The end?

afcb_acklam said:
www.pravda.com.ua

Russian offensive in Kharkiv Oblast: ISW analyses Russiaâs goals

Analysts at the Institute for the Study of War report that the Russians are pursuing several goals with their offensive in Kharkiv Oblast: to draw Ukrainian forces away from other areas, to advance within range of artillery fire on Kharkiv, to create a âbuffer zoneâ to protect Belgorod, and to...
www.pravda.com.ua www.pravda.com.ua
Click to expand...

From what I understand, Ukrainian command are fairly pleased with this move. They think the Russians are perhaps insane for applying their efforts in this area. Meanwhile Ukraine has their own offensive plans.
 
WeeGord said:
Shoigu 'to be replaced'
Click to expand...

Basically, Shoigu has been fired. Toast. Predictable after his "wallet" was arrested.

So, for those who think that we're accentuating the positive here.... this is real. If Russia was doing fantastically well in this war, would Shoigu be hoofed? Hell no. This week, something in the order of 10,000 Russian troops have gone (sadly, for their friends and families). 3 fighter bombers downed (millions each). Several refineries, fuel depots and military production facilities hit. Ukraine has made inroads in several places along the Dnipro south bank .... for "reasons".

Anyway, Konstantin is on it
 
borolad259 said:
From what I understand, Ukrainian command are fairly pleased with this move. They think the Russians are perhaps insane for applying their efforts in this area. Meanwhile Ukraine has their own offensive plans.
Click to expand...
One report asked if it was to draw some of the defenders from other places eg Donbas
 
TeessideCleveland said:
One report asked if it was to draw some of the defenders from other places eg Donbas
Click to expand...

They may be trying that, but they must have known that the 1st Combined Army was already there, so Ukraine doesn't really need to move much. In fact, the opposite is true. The concentration of Russian forces on the east is now leaving gaps in the south.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hap
Is there any truth in the US has asked Ukraine to stop attacking refineries in Russia? If thats the case what would be the logic behind it? Surely the more refineries they take out the better.
 
Nero80 said:
Is there any truth in the US has asked Ukraine to stop attacking refineries in Russia? If thats the case what would be the logic behind it? Surely the more refineries they take out the better.
Click to expand...
Some time ago, a few weeks maybe a month or two, a few US politicians were making noises along those lines. As far as I can recall it was never "official"? I think the logic was along the lines that it would increase fuel prices in the run up to the Presidential election. I believe Ukraine told them to STFU. I paraphrase here.
 
Muttley said:
Some time ago, a few weeks maybe a month or two, a few US politicians were making noises along those lines. As far as I can recall it was never "official"? I think the logic was along the lines that it would increase fuel prices in the run up to the Presidential election. I believe Ukraine told them to STFU. I paraphrase here.
Click to expand...
Ah fair enough, cheers muttley 👍
 
Will_Graham said:
Problem is, history shows us they don't really care about losses. They just keep relentlessly sacrificing their men as they try and grind the opposition into submission.
Click to expand...
This os sadly true. If you ignore them as human lives as the Russian generals would, then you cam calculate the losses against the amount of personal I'm the armed force compared to Ukrainian losses and their armed forces size. Or, given conscription and volunteers, the population of the 2 countries
 
SmallTown said:
This os sadly true. If you ignore them as human lives as the Russian generals would, then you cam calculate the losses against the amount of personal I'm the armed force compared to Ukrainian losses and their armed forces size. Or, given conscription and volunteers, the population of the 2 countries
Click to expand...
They'll definitely look upon it as being attritionally sustainable, based on comparative population sizes. Thankfully the equipment and fuel ratio should swing the balance. The loss ratio appears to be ridiculously lop-sided.
 
This has been going on 2 1/2 years, or 10 years if you want to go back to the crimea invasion. They've locked themselves in an unwinnable war. Even if they manage to beat back the ukrainian forces, the land mass is too big to be able to maintain control. Russian losses will continue with or without control of ukraine. It's pretty clear that even a full takeover of ukrainian soil and state, would just give rise to a guerilla warfare, that it would be ungovernable.

What is the end game, how does this play out into a resolution where peaceful can prevail?
 
BoroMart said:
What is the end game, how does this play out into a resolution where peaceful can prevail?
Click to expand...
The only end game is Russia lose and lose embarrassingly. The port of Sevastopol is a key strategic asset, loss of that would be humiliating and would probably lead to an exit window for Putin.

But after that there will be continued unrest in part of the former USSR. The influence of Russia will be much diminished and other states (Georgia, Moldova, Kazakhstan, etc.) will side with either EU/NATO or perhaps an alternative regional power. China is certainly eyeing increasing it's regional "influence". I've always thought that this is the much overdue end of the "Russia Empire". But for Stalin becoming the enemy of my enemy (Hitler), it would have probably happened much earlier. The USSR was propped up by huge materiel aid from US/UK during WW2 and also acquired a lot of German technology as the Red Army swept west.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hap
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top