The Russian Invasion of the Ukraine.

[Wildy]

Real leadership is childish posturing I guess

eyeroll

Care to elaborate?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Putin put ill-equipped, new conscripts with barely any training on the front lines as canon fodder. Not really soldiers in any meaningful way.

That isn't how it works, he doesn't have much more than conscript cannon fodder.
If you want to win a battle you attack with your best units and take your objectives, you don't waste three days wasting your fuel and ammunition reserves.
An armoured division needs a huge amount of fuel to operate and Ukraine is a huge country, you don't piss it away on 'cannon fodder' unless that's all you have.

 

[Tero]

This is taking longer than expected. It is really irritating Putin. He was going to unify the old Federation and hand it over to a protege to finish after he retires in 2024.

 

[angrysoba]

Real leadership is childish posturing I guess

eyeroll

What is "childish posturing"? Staying in a city under bombardment by one of the reputed superpowers of the world? Calling on the world to send ammunition instead of an escape route for himself?

Seriously?!?

This guy truly puts Western politicians (the vast majority of them at any rate) to utter shame.

They also put posturing libertarians to shame as well.

 

[Oystein]

Why is it nonsense?
The Russians are obviously having difficulties making any of their objectives and haven't taken anything major yet.

Can you please give a citation for what the Russian objectives are, including targets for when they planned to have those objectives met, so I, too, can see the "obvious"?

What I see is that Russia has taking the fight into Kyiv MUCH faster than anyone imagined on Thursday morning, so I don't see it as "obvious" at all that they are behind schedule.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

I’ve found it noteworthy and commendable that the Ukrainian government is handing out AK47’s and other armament to civilians, trained or untrained in their use. And instructing civilians on how to make Molotov cocktails.

Streetfighting in Kiev could be a nightmare for Russian troops if they start receiving fire from multiple high rises and firefights on nearly every street corner.

Guerilla fighting can bog down the Russian troops and inflict huge casualties, albeit on both sides. Even if the Russians prevail in the near term, partisans continuing to fight and sabotage their troops and supply lines could make the occupation extremely costly, in both blood and treasure. We’ll see if the Russian populace has the stomach for it, especially after their experiences in Afghanistan.

 

[Oystein]

This is taking longer than expected.

Whose expectation, and can you cite anyone voicing such expectations before, say. Friday?

Did YOU expect on Thursday that Russian troops would already be in Kyiv this soon?

 

[BobTheCoward]

What is "childish posturing"? Staying in a city under bombardment by one of the reputed superpowers of the world? Calling on the world to send ammunition instead of an escape route for himself?

Seriously?!?

This guy truly puts Western politicians (the vast majority of them at any rate) to utter shame.

They also put posturing libertarians to shame as well.

Yes, staying in the city is posturing.

 

[Scorpion]

What about the Ukrainian air force bombing the kremlin?

 

[Andy_Ross]

Can you please give a citation for what the Russian objectives are, including targets for when they planned to have those objectives met, so I, too, can see the "obvious"?

What I see is that Russia has taking the fight into Kyiv MUCH faster than anyone imagined on Thursday morning, so I don't see it as "obvious" at all that they are behind schedule.

Well, any of the major cities or airportsand military bases.

As for Kyiv, they have infiltrated some special forces and light units but they are far from taking the city.

100 hours is usually the expected efficient fighting limit unless you can replace the troops at the front with fresh units and resupply.
That is why we usually see a break in battle or ceasefire after 4 to 5 days.

By the end of the first day I would have expected the Russians to have at least one major airfield that could be used for resupply, bridges and other strategic locations secured etc. It's not as if it's unknown territory for the Russians, it was one of the pivotal theatres in WW2 and fought over on the retreat and again on the offensive.
The |Russians do not have big enough reserves or logistics to keep the battle going for more than another few days.

 

[Wildy]

This is taking longer than expected. It is really irritating Putin. He was going to unify the old Federation and hand it over to a protege to finish after he retires in 2024.

I doubt that would have been achievable in that time frame. You'd still have to get the Baltic states to join, and then Georgia, then you'd have to get Turkmenistan to actually join the CIS instead of being an associate member. Then after that you'd have to find a way to ratchet up the control of the CIS so that the nominal independence of the member countries is that - nominal.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Whose expectation, and can you cite anyone voicing such expectations before, say. Friday?

Did YOU expect on Thursday that Russian troops would already be in Kyiv this soon?

They aren't in Kyiv in any more than token strength. There have been infiltrations, there are no major units in the city.

 

[Andy_Ross]

The UK's defence ministry says Russian forces remain more than 30km away from Kyiv city centre.
Russian forces may now be regrouping after an initial failed attempt at infiltrating Kyiv

In the eastern city of Kharkiv, Ukraine forces have fought off a Russian attack but shelling continues.
There have also been clashes near the southern city of Odesa.
Russia says it has captured the south-eastern city of Melitopol but the UK has cast doubt on the claim.

 

[angrysoba]

So, please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Russians initially take and then lose TWO airfields in and around Kiev? I presume that if they attemped to take them and then lost them, that would easily count as two objectives which they failed to accomplish.

 

[BobTheCoward]

I will admit that I thought things would be going worse for Ukraine

 

[Oystein]

Many are reporting on the Ukrainian claims....

Reply not directed at you specifically, Ryokan, but everybody:

Yes, "many" are "reporting" - a claim has a source, that source is (typically) picked up by some news agency, then news outlets run with it if it seems noteworthy. The quality outlets report with a caveat that such claims are hard to veryfy.

This forum here is not a news blog, not a news aggregator. It's the International SKEPTICS Forum, and our nature is to examine claims for veracity, plausibility, drill down to sources, examine and evaluate them - be skeptical.

E.g. Let's look at this claim, and the specific number "3500 Russian soldiers killed".
It's not "more than 1000", not "close to 5000" - it's a number that appears to have some degree of precision. It's not merely a ballpark number, it suggests it is precise to within less than +/-300, or about 10%.

So, how does a number like "3500" come about?
How, in general, do you add the number of enemy soldiers killed by your side?
Well, first step is of course the enemy soldiers have to die. It has been pointed out that 3500 casualties in less than 3 days would be extraordinary when compared to historical precedents, so it's somewhat implausible to start with.
Then, your units must be in a position to see the enemy casualties and verify they actually die. In most cases, we may assume that Ukrainian units do not quickly take over the space occupied by the Russians right when the Ukrainians fought them, and so most Russian fatalities will likely be recovered by Russians. So, how sure is the individual unit they observed x deaths on the other side? Would units rather over- or underestimate such numbers? I think reasons for both can be hypothesized.
Next up, units must report such enemy fatalities up some chain of command, or directly into a central command, where such reports are aggregated. Here we have the problem that perhaps not every such report is generated, passed on, received and processed in the first place; surely some units will have trouble communicating. The processing somehow must make sure that several units are not including the same fatalities.

Or perhaps the whole reporting of enemy fatalities is not based on units reporting comprehensively but rather on rough estimates extrapolating ... something?

Remember the numbers of casualties reported right after 9/11? They generally turned out to be far too high - they were estimates made in good faith at a time when there had been no chance yet to count all the survivors.
In war, reporting must not be assumed to be made in good faith.

---

So ... has anyone gone to the root of that number "3500" and inquired how such a number is generated?

I think it is fair to assume that it is more plausible than anything else that this number is based not on valid tallying and doing an actual count and rather on considerations of "what's the highest number we can get away with?". I.e. would the same news outlets report the number if it were 35,000? Or 350,000? No - everybody would laugh and call it a lie too obvious. 3500? Sounds ... possible.
350 perhaps more likely.

 

[trustbutverify]

Why is it nonsense?
The Russians are obviously having difficulties making any of their objectives and haven't taken anything major yet.

I wish it were true. But that number seems incredibly high considering the time span. Obviously, Federation forces are dramatically under-performing.

 

[Andy_Ross]

So, please correct me if I am wrong, but didn't the Russians initially take and then lose TWO airfields in and around Kiev? I presume that if they attempted to take them and then lost them, that would easily count as two objectives which they failed to accomplish.

They tried to take them with airborne forces but the attack was defeated.
it's a classic move, drop forces on to the airfield and secure it so reinforcements can land then expand the perimeter and wait for your ground forces to link up.

A forward airbase makes your resupply a lot easier in that you don't have to completely rely on the long road tail for supplies.

 

[trustbutverify]

Many are reporting on the Ukrainian claims. A quick google will give you many reports on this claim.

Here's just one:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/worl...ukraine-invasion-war-humiliated-captured-kyiv

But yes, it's probably inflated and a number used as propaganda and to bolster Ukrainian morale.

We will see. I don't think there's any doubt the Russians have had casualties, and probably more than they expected.

Clearly.

 

[Andy_Ross]

I wish it were true. But that number seems incredibly high considering the time span. Obviously, Federation forces are dramatically under-performing.

Are they under performing though?

they are the attackers in unfamiliar open country, the defenders are on home territory and in prepared position with prepared fallback positions.

Russian training and equipment is not the best.

It is the same pattern as the WW2 defensive battles. Keep hitting then falling back to new defensive positions then repeat. There is one main difference between WW2 and now, the Russians do not have the manpower or equipment reserves to sustain an offensive for very long.