• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Cont: The Russian Invasion of Ukraine part 8

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michel H said:
I am actually not a Russia fan, I am just a simple common sense fan.

The right to self-determination (after a careful examination) can also apply to places where Russia and China don't want it to apply, for example in Kosovo and Taiwan.

There is no question that Russia, in the conflict which is discussed in this thread, enjoys some mitigating circumstances: it invaded only (mostly) Russian-speaking areas, and it set up referendums.

One has certainly seen crazier things in history, for example when France (in the 19th century) and Germany (in the 20th) invaded Russia.
Click to expand...

Those are completely different situations from USSR->Russia/Ukraine given even cursory examination. Hell... Taiwan is more of a metaphor for Finland-USSR.
 
TurkeysGhost said:
Don't take my description of this situation as an endorsement.

How exactly do you see this war ending? Ukrainian tanks rolling on Moscow?
Click to expand...

Ukraine has a number of fresh assault brigades that have not yet entered the fight. I see this war ending with a negotiated peace following Moscow's expulsion from Ukraine. Ukrainian tanks rolling on Moscow? No. Ukrainian tanks poised to roll on Belgorod? Yes.
 
theprestige said:
Ukraine has a number of fresh assault brigades that have not yet entered the fight. I see this war ending with a negotiated peace following Moscow's expulsion from Ukraine. Ukrainian tanks rolling on Moscow? No. Ukrainian tanks poised to roll on Belgorod? Yes.
Click to expand...

Are you thinking pre-war borders or Crimea too? If I were a betting man I'd think the former.
 
lobosrul5 said:
The likeliest IMO is Putin bein defenestrated by the powerful people for whom he's costing a fortune. They might try and negotiated for Crimea. Who knows. But mainly they will want the war to be done and sanctions lifted.
Click to expand...

This seems moderately likely to me. Russia is hoping to dig in until the West tires of supplying Ukraine. But Ukraine almost certainly has the will to keep resisting until something in Russia breaks, and Russia looks kinda brittle.
 
Michel H said:
One has certainly seen crazier things in history, for example when France (in the 19th century) and Germany (in the 20th) invaded Russia.
Click to expand...

19th century imperialism has... what precisely to do with Russia invading a sovereign country 200 years later?? Germany v USSR (NOT JUST RUSSIA) in the 1940's was one horrible ****** dictatorship invading another. We supported the USSR because they were the enemy of our enemy. This is different. We're supporting a democracy from a brutal authoritarian dictatorship. THIS SHOULD NEVER EVER BE TOLERATED. I cannot stress this enough. Freedom dies if this is allowed to keep happening. What makes you, Michel H, special in Belgium over the people of Ukraine? How about the rest of the democracies of the world say: tough **** that's you're own problem if YOU were invaded. I'm sure as **** as the Russian Navy is, they'd be powerful enough to overwhelm your nations, and put a few brigades into Antwerp.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
19th century imperialism has... what precisely to do with Russia invading a sovereign country 200 years later?? Germany v USSR (NOT JUST RUSSIA) in the 1940's was one horrible ****** dictatorship invading another. We supported the USSR because they were the enemy of our enemy. This is different. We're supporting a democracy from a brutal authoritarian dictatorship. THIS SHOULD NEVER EVER BE TOLERATED. I cannot stress this enough. Freedom dies if this is allowed to keep happening. What makes you, Michel H, special in Belgium over the people of Ukraine? How about the rest of the democracies of the world say: tough **** that's you're own problem if YOU were invaded. I'm sure as **** as the Russian Navy is, they'd be powerful enough to overwhelm your nations, and put a few brigades into Antwerp.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think Russia is really threatening Western Europe, saying such things seems to be part of Ukraine's propaganda scheme: "We are protecting you" (sic). Actually understand: "We are taking your money and raising energy prices, and creating a terrible mess, not only for ourselves but also for others".

Ukraine is very special for Russia because of a number of reasons: It was an important part of the Soviet Union, but is now trying to join NATO, it has a significant Russian-speaking minority, part of which is pro-Russian, and there is the Black Sea Fleet, located in Crimea.

I believe there is also an ugly aspect in what Russia did by invading Ukraine in 2022: they probably wanted to prove they were a major great military power, and they were seeking revenge after humiliating sanctions.
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
No, I don't think Russia is really threatening Western Europe, saying such things seems to be part of Ukraine's propaganda scheme: "We are protecting you" (sic). Actually understand: "We are taking your money and raising energy prices, and creating a terrible mess, not only for ourselves but also for others".

Ukraine is very special for Russia because of a number of reasons: It was an important part of the Soviet Union, but is now trying to join NATO, it has a significant Russian-speaking minority, part of which is pro-Russian, and there is the Black Sea Fleet, located in Crimea.
Click to expand...

Underlined: RUSSIA IS NOT THE SOVIET UNION. sarcasm--> You know what, I support Ukraine taking over Russia because Kyiv was originally the capital like hundreds of years ago!!
Highlighted: GEE I WONDER WHY?
Italics: I guess you are OK if the USA invaded Canada, but only the English speaking part?
Bolded: Oh, so Russia bases their fleet in a harbor they illegally annexed so that makes it theirs in perpetuity?
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
How will they stop it?
Click to expand...

100 successive lines of mobiks in trenches, with 100000 old Soviet mines between them? Trade 100 Russian lives for every Ukrainian soldier. Maybe stick babushkas in the trenches to demoralize the UAF? How they're going to stop Ukraine from launching an amphibious assault after the Black Sea Fleet is demolished though :confused:
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
100 successive lines of mobiks in trenches, with 100000 old Soviet mines between them? Trade 100 Russian lives for every Ukrainian soldier. Maybe stick babushkas in the trenches to demoralize the UAF? How they're going to stop Ukraine from launching an amphibious assault after the Black Sea Fleet is demolished though :confused:
Click to expand...

Russia has a much larger population and can afford a much higher attrition rate, so yeah, they could conceivably incur huge losses in every battle and still end up achieving victory.

For as laughably bad as they started this war, they have improved their tactics considerably. War tends to have a rapid selection where people that are really bad at it don't live very long.
 
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost said:
Russia has a much larger population and can afford a much higher attrition rate, so yeah, they could conceivably incur huge losses in every battle and still end up achieving victory.

For as laughably bad as they started this war, they have improved their tactics considerably. War tends to have a rapid selection where people that are really bad at it don't live very long.
Click to expand...

3.5:1 would make the loss rate equal on a per-capita basis.

But Russia tolerates very high casualty levels (for a variety of reasons). So really I think Russia could tolerate a loss ratio of as high (or higher than) 7:1 for as long as Ukraine can. (7 Rus:1 Ukr casualty)
 
Last edited:
TurkeysGhost said:
Russia has a much larger population and can afford a much higher attrition rate, so yeah, they could conceivably incur huge losses in every battle and still end up achieving victory.

For as laughably bad as they started this war, they have improved their tactics considerably. War tends to have a rapid selection where people that are really bad at it don't live very long.
Click to expand...

To be serious, I do think Ukraine will likely* retake Crimea so long as "The West" keeps supplying them. However, I think Russia will collapse on the cusp of facing the loss of Crimea, and their troops will surrender. It will be a bit like the end of the Soviet-Afghani war.

*I'm not certain, more like 2 to 1 odds in favor.
 
crescent said:
3.5:1 would make the loss rate equal on a per-capita basis.

But Russia tolerates very high casualty levels (for a variety of reasons). So really I think Russia could tolerate a loss ratio of as high (or higher than) 7:1 for as long as Ukraine can.
Click to expand...

We did, upthread discuss on just how much of their workforce Russia can tolerate going to their military before collapse. I'm still a bit unconvinced that its quite as bad as some posters make it... but 7 to 1? No. Russia won't be able to take those kind of casualty figures for more than a couple of years.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul5 said:
To be serious, I do think Ukraine will likely* retake Crimea so long as "The West" keeps supplying them. However, I think Russia will collapse on the cusp of facing the loss of Crimea, and their troops will surrender. It will be a bit like the end of the Soviet-Afghani war.

*I'm not certain, more like 2 to 1 odds in favor.
Click to expand...

IF Ukraine is able to get into a position where they can force Russia to the table on terms favourable to Ukraine, then yes, by that stage Crimea will be in play, too.

Otherwise, they just won't be able to do it and most of what is currently occupied will stay occupied.

It's going to be pretty much all or nothing from here.

For my actual prognostication:

I think Russia will be unable to sustain eventually. Having a larger population doesn't mean you can sustain an occupation indefinitely. They'll get pushed out by hook or by crook, but will never formally acknowledge a peace. You'll get a border like in the Koreas, but Russia will be brazen enough to occasionally lob a missile across the border.
 
Michel H said:
I am actually not a Russia fan, I am just a simple common sense fan.

The right to self-determination (after a careful examination) can also apply to places where Russia and China don't want it to apply, for example in Kosovo and Taiwan.

There is no question that Russia, in the conflict which is discussed in this thread, enjoys some mitigating circumstances: it invaded only (mostly) Russian-speaking areas, and it set up referendums.

One has certainly seen crazier things in history, for example when France (in the 19th century) and Germany (in the 20th) invaded Russia.
Click to expand...

Repetition doesn't make ridiculous claims any more true. Just exactly who do you think you're fooling?
 
Mike! said:
Once the Kerch bridge is finally FUBR, I suspect Crimea will fall pretty quickly.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it's one reason to supply ATACMS, to at least put any traffic under threat of attack.

Completely changing the subject

Gennady Lopyrev who oversaw the building of one of Putin's dachas and who had been imprisoned for bribery has died of a "sudden illness"

https://www.rferl.org/a/kremlin-bodyguard-bribery-dies-prison-/32551991.html

And Gennady Zhidko (former commander of Russian forces in Ukraine) has died after " a long illness"

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...-general-gennady-zhidko-death-intl/index.html
 
Michel H said:
Yes, they tried to take Kiev at the beginning of their "special military operation", because they wanted to restore Viktor Yanukovych as the president of Ukraine, which they believe (with some arguments) had been illegally overthrown.



But they gave up fairly quickly, after military setbacks.



A good example of Russian common sense.
Click to expand...
I wonder if Russian commonsense would say that Russia is better off now than it was at the start of the war,
 
jimbob said:
Indeed, it's one reason to supply ATACMS, to at least put any traffic under threat of attack.



Completely changing the subject



Gennady Lopyrev who oversaw the building of one of Putin's dachas and who had been imprisoned for bribery has died of a "sudden illness"



https://www.rferl.org/a/kremlin-bodyguard-bribery-dies-prison-/32551991.html



And Gennady Zhidko (former commander of Russian forces in Ukraine) has died after " a long illness"



https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...-general-gennady-zhidko-death-intl/index.html
Click to expand...
Novochok can do that to someone,
 
lobosrul5 said:
We did, upthread discuss on just how much of their workforce Russia can tolerate going to their military before collapse. I'm still a bit unconvinced that its quite as bad as some posters make it... but 7 to 1? No. Russia won't be able to take those kind of casualty figures for more than a couple of years.
Click to expand...
That depends on how many we are talking about in absolute figures. For a time now the casualties have been much lower than last year.
 
steenkh said:
That depends on how many we are talking about in absolute figures. For a time now the casualties have been much lower than last year.
Click to expand...

True, although Russian casualties recently, seem to be running at about average for the length of the war.

But, I don't think Russia can sustain 7 times the number of casualties that Ukraine can potentially sustain without totally economically collapsing, and then what, they send guys armed with sharp sticks fed with raw turnips? I should've specified that more clearly.
 
My sense is that Moscow very much wants this to be a war of attrition. They think they have an advantage in such a war, and they don't mind the absolute brutality such a war must visit upon their own army.

Kyiv, however, is doing their best to make it a war of erosion. Not trading lives and equipment at an exchange rate that favors Moscow in the long run, but steadily eroding Moscow's ability to wage war in Ukraine, until the hollowed-out shell of the invading army collapses and is swept away.

It remains to be seen if Ukraine can complete the work of erosion, before succumbing to Moscow's horrific calculus of attrition. Also I suspect that Moscow doesn't actually have the numbers of troops and equipment they need, to really make the attrition thing work.
 
theprestige said:
My sense is that Moscow very much wants this to be a war of attrition. They think they have an advantage in such a war, and they don't mind the absolute brutality such a war must visit upon their own army.

Kyiv, however, is doing their best to make it a war of erosion. Not trading lives and equipment at an exchange rate that favors Moscow in the long run, but steadily eroding Moscow's ability to wage war in Ukraine, until the hollowed-out shell of the invading army collapses and is swept away.

It remains to be seen if Ukraine can complete the work of erosion, before succumbing to Moscow's horrific calculus of attrition. Also I suspect that Moscow doesn't actually have the numbers of troops and equipment they need, to really make the attrition thing work.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking that if we don't see a major offensive by Ukraine in the next couple of weeks its not coming until at least late next spring. But, maybe thats not true. As far as attrition levels go, right now Russia has many thousands of guys sitting in trenches guarding the front... uhh how absolutely horrific is it going to be for those guys in the coming months? During the cold late autumn rains and then the freezing snowy winter. Are they going to be able to keep their soldiers on the front warm, dry, fed, and still actually there, guarding the front. They'll have to do much more rotation of men in and out of the front line and Ukraine might be able to take advantage of that. These will be men who are either recent conscripts, are have been at war since February 2022. Exhaustion and low moral is going to be a huge issue for Russia.
 
a_unique_person said:
I wonder if Russian commonsense would say that Russia is better off now than it was at the start of the war,
Click to expand...
Objectively, I don't think Russia is better off now because of Putin's major invasion.

But some Russians are probably feeling proud because Russia has been able to enlarge the territory it controls.

There are probably even some people who believe that these kinds of things are more important than some individual lives.
 
lobosrul5 said:
I was just thinking that if we don't see a major offensive by Ukraine in the next couple of weeks its not coming until at least late next spring.
Click to expand...

They've got a bit more time than that. Last year's Ukrainian counter offensives in Kharkiv and Kherson started to really move in mid/late September and ran into mid October.

It's painful to watch in real time, it feels so slow. And it might yet not succeed this year. But they've still got time.
 
Russia being Russia

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russian-military-bosses-find-a-new-way-to-scam-families-of-dead-troops

Russian military commissars in Crimea have reportedly come up with a new scam to get rich using the bodies of dead soldiers—by extorting the grieving family members.

That’s according to the human rights group Crimea SOS, which reported Thursday that military commissars have been lying to family members of soldiers killed in Ukraine about the whereabouts of their remains. While the bodies are already stored at a morgue in Simferopol, the group says, military officials tell families they have to pay an extra fee to have the remains retrieved from the battlefield.
Click to expand...
 
lobosrul5 said:
100 successive lines of mobiks in trenches, with 100000 old Soviet mines between them? Trade 100 Russian lives for every Ukrainian soldier. Maybe stick babushkas in the trenches to demoralize the UAF? How they're going to stop Ukraine from launching an amphibious assault after the Black Sea Fleet is demolished though :confused:
Click to expand...

They are running out of mines and men. More importantly the men are running out of a willingness to fight
 
TurkeysGhost said:
Russia has a much larger population and can afford a much higher attrition rate, so yeah, they could conceivably incur huge losses in every battle and still end up achieving victory.

For as laughably bad as they started this war, they have improved their tactics considerably. War tends to have a rapid selection where people that are really bad at it don't live very long.
Click to expand...


You are funny
 
crescent said:
3.5:1 would make the loss rate equal on a per-capita basis.

But Russia tolerates very high casualty levels (for a variety of reasons). So really I think Russia could tolerate a loss ratio of as high (or higher than) 7:1 for as long as Ukraine can. (7 Rus:1 Ukr casualty)
Click to expand...

Haha
 
Michel H said:
Objectively, I don't think Russia is better off now because of Putin's major invasion.

But some Russians are probably feeling proud because Russia has been able to enlarge the territory it controls.
There are probably even some people who believe that these kinds of things are more important than some individual lives.
Click to expand...
That is so last century.
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/17/ukraine-counteroffensive-melitopol/

U.S. intelligence community assesses that Ukraine’s counteroffensive will fail to reach the key southeastern city of Melitopol, people familiar with the classified forecast told The Washington Post, a finding that, should it prove correct, would mean Kyiv won’t fulfill its principal objective of severing Russia’s land bridge to Crimea in this year’s push.

The grim assessment is based on Russia’s brutal proficiency in defending occupied territory through a phalanx of minefields and trenches, and is likely to prompt finger pointing inside Kyiv and Western capitals about why a counteroffensive that saw tens of billions of dollars of Western weapons and military equipment fell short of its goals.

Ukraine’s forces, which are pushing toward Melitopol from the town of Robotyne more than 50 miles away, will remain several miles outside of the city, U.S. officials said. U.S., Western and Ukrainian government officials interviewed for this report spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military operations.
Click to expand...
 
Pixel42 said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/17/ukraine-counteroffensive-melitopol/
Click to expand...

The logic there looks suspicious. It's entirely plausible that Melitopol will remain in Russian hands when Ukraine's current counteroffensive culminates, of course, and even quite probable if the claim is actually "in August," as I've seen claimed is the qualification well into that article. By the look of it, though, breaking the land bridge is entirely plausible even in scenarios where it hasn't been taken. Also, the ramifications of "several miles outside the city" include that Russian logistics would be almost completely broken and the remainder easily within Ukrainian artillery fire range, provided that several was being used in a more normal sense.

As it stands, retaking Urozhaine is another step towards breaking through Russian lines and cutting off the land bridge where Russian defenses seem to be significantly weaker.
 
Last edited:
More on bad treatment and poor morale in even supposedly elite units.

No wonder they treat everyone else badly too.

https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1690093747650842624?s=20

1/ Injuried Russian marines near Tokmak in the occupied part of Ukraine's Zaporizhzhya region were berated and beaten unconscious by their political officer when they asked for medical assistance. The incident was recorded and illustrates how Russia's political officers work. ⬇️
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom