The Russian Invasion of the Ukraine.

[Oystein]

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

Did YOU expect this on Thursday?

 

[trustbutverify]

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.

I agree, but the idea seems to have been forcing Ukraine to waste their precious resources on expendable pawns, followed by the pieces rolling through light resistance. Things have clearly not gone according to plan.

 

[Oystein]

The UK's defence ministry says Russian forces remain more than 30km away from Kyiv city centre.
...

Sounds like the Ukrainian claims to be fighting and killing Russian forces in the outskirts of Kyiv aren't exactly true then. Or perhaps the forces 30 km away are there to replace the troops at the front with fresh units and resupply? So they can go longer than 100 hours?

You evaded the question of sourcing the "expectation" before the event. An expectation is no good if it first appears after the fact.

 

[Oystein]

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

I think if there is one and only one lesson we all learned in recent days it's that Russia has prepared for all of this for a long time - and nobody else has.

 

[angrysoba]

Did YOU expect this on Thursday?

The question is did the Russians? If they did, then failing to achieve that aim would mean they failed in their objectives.

 

[Ryokan]

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.

I think that during the invasion of Iraq, if Iraqi Su-27s were still in the air and supporting Iraqi ground troops against American ground troops on the third day, it would have been considered a disaster.

 

[jimbob]

The Ukranians are claiming Turkey will close the Bosphorous to Russian ships.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/l...fighting-kyiv-zelenskiy-assault-putin-capital

Not sure how this would actually work


And googling suggests there might be treaty exemptions which prevent Turkey from doing it to at least some Russian ships

 

[dudalb]

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

If this keeps up, PUtin may order machine guns set up behind attacking Russian Ttoopd "to encourage them" a la Stalin in World War 2. The opening of the film on Stalingrad " Enemy On the Gates " is dead on accurate.
A greatmany of the military experts are saying Putin does not want to risk his good units in combat except as a last resort.

 

[dudalb]

The question is did the Russians? If they did, then failing to achieve that aim would mean they failed in their objectives.

I would say, yes, they probably expected to take Kiev very quickly. It's not going to plan.
I

 

[theprestige]

There's no point discussing the ethics or legality of it. It can't happen, because currently Ukraine isn't worth risking an all-out war with Russia. It's sad but true.

Why is this rhetoric all so one sided? Why not say Ukraine isn't worth risking an all out war with NATO, and let Putin poop his pants for a bit? Is he really ready to go full HAM on western Europe just because of a no fly zone over Kiev? I doubt it.

 

[Oystein]

The question is did the Russians? If they did, then failing to achieve that aim would mean they failed in their objectives.

Well, surely you can validly claim the Russians expected this - if you can provide evidence they had that expectation, right?

I think everybody here who is true to the spirit of the International SKEPTICS Forum will agree without ado that, since we don't have any statements from the Russian side about how fast they would achieve which expectations, we do not know whether or not they failed to achieve their expecations.
So I am asking: Did anyone else express and expectations before the fact? Like for example the posters themselves who are now making a claim that some expectation was failed

It's the old "You make a claim, you have burden of evidence".

 

[BobTheCoward]

I think that during the invasion of Iraq, if Iraqi Su-27s were still in the air and supporting Iraqi ground troops against American ground troops on the third day, it would have been considered a disaster.

it would have been a disaster because the US is better than Russia and Iraq is worse than Ukraine.

But when the seeding is so much closer, is it a disaster?

 

[dudalb]

What is important, is that the Ukranians have become heros to much of the world, and now the political pressure to help them short of boots on the ground is going to pretty intense.
BTW I now think that Biden's No boots on the ground statment back in December was a mistake. Eveni if we had no intention of sending in Ground troops, we could have kept Putin guessing. That is the policy we have adapted in reference to Taiwan.

 

[trustbutverify]

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.

I'm not a military expert. However, I expected far better coordination from the invasion force than what's been reported so far. I've also been impressed with the intense fighting spirit displayed by the Ukrainians.

 

[Oystein]

I would say, yes, they probably expected to take Kiev very quickly. It's not going to plan.
I

I expected that you would say that.
I have no evidence I actually expected that.
But who needs evidence in a SKEPTICS forum.

 

[angrysoba]

Well, surely you can validly claim the Russians expected this - if you can provide evidence they had that expectation, right?

I think everybody here who is true to the spirit of the International SKEPTICS Forum will agree without ado that, since we don't have any statements from the Russian side about how fast they would achieve which expectations, we do not know whether or not they failed to achieve their expecations.
So I am asking: Did anyone else express and expectations before the fact? Like for example the posters themselves who are now making a claim that some expectation was failed

It's the old "You make a claim, you have burden of evidence".

I have no idea.

I am only going with the assumption that if an attack was thwarted, or the ground taken was reclaimed, it presumably counts as failure of an objective.

 

[dudalb]

Ukraine claims to have killed 3500 Russian soldiers.

If that's true, or anywhere near true, that's insane.

In comparison, on the worst day of the Vietnam war, the Americans lost under 250 soldiers.

But at Antietam, on Sep 17,1862 3300 Americans died .

 

[Fast Eddie B]

BTW I now think that Biden's No boots on the ground statment back in December was a mistake. Eveni if we had no intention of sending in Ground troops, we could have kept Putin guessing.

Agreed. A simple “All options are on the table” from Biden would have sent a message, even if in truth some options had been eliminated from consideration.

 

[jimbob]

Agreed. A simple “All options are on the table” from Biden would have sent a message, even if in truth some options had been eliminated from consideration.

Yup. One doesn't tell people what one's options are in such a situation.

 

[Oystein]

I'm not a military expert. However, I expected far better coordination from the invasion force than what's been reported so far. I've also been impressed with the intense fighting spirit displayed by the Ukrainians.

You have reports about the quality of Russian coordination and Ukrainian fighting spirit from ... whom? And you vetted them ... how?
And thinking back, when did you form that expectation, and how did you formulate it in terms that would enable you to compare your expected level of coordination with the observed level of coordination, given that you are "not a military expert"?


Folks, you are ALL not military experts - none of you have planned an invasion lately, and certainly not with the specific situation as basic data that the Ukraine-Russia conflict presents.

NONE of you knows what the Russians planned for or expected.

ALL the news you are so happy and quick to re-post here are dubious and in need of vetting.

We can observe, we can analyze, we can perhaps compare - but we should also do a little skeptic thinking before we post. In war, being skeptic is essential.