User Controls
Military Genius Zelensky wants Ukrainians to throw molotovs at Russian tanks
-
2022-03-30 at 11:25 PM UTCNumbers matter. Russia is fighting a war of manoeuvre, avoiding Ukrainian strong points and retreating from the few Ukrainian offensives, encircling the Ukrainian units, and taking their time to defeat them in detail (meaning you separate out individual parts of the enemy and attack with overwhelming numbers).
The Russians are doing offensives and feints, like moving on Kyiv. If the assault on Kyiv had went well, I'm sure the Russians would have taken it, but it didn't, so the Russians reacted to what was happening. They kept troops outside Kyiv for a while to keep the Ukrainian troops in Kyiv, now they are leaving without doing an attack. Something similar happened in Odessa, where the Russian fleet made out they were going to land, then didn't. Again a lot of troops would have been tied down.
Meanwhile Ukraine is fighting very well, but they are fighting a fortress city defence, in line with soviet doctrine aimed to slow down a NATO advance on the soviet union. But they are fighting reactively, only delaying the Russians, and any Ukrainian units still out in the field are being bled white.
Ukraine will gain many minor tactical victories, like liberating Irpin after the Russians fell back, but the Russians decide where the fight happens. The Russians will decide what they want and take it. The Ukrainians can only resist and complain. I don't see any signs of good leadership from the Ukrainians, just Zelensky being an annoying jedi loudmouth. The individual soldiers are fighting bravely though, like Azov, who fought like demons in their last stand in Mariupol.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2022-03-30 at 11:26 PM UTC
Originally posted by Number13 If you knew anything about the current conflict you'd know that numbers are the deciding factor, similar if not identical training descended from the same schools, well familiar ground considering it's previously held territory and right on their border, and with many legitimate can point to objectives vs defending their land(many of which just want to flee)
Are you intentionally being obtuse?
Morale...
Sun Tzu... Ground...
You are a civilian arm chair general... -
2022-03-31 at 12:10 AM UTC
-
2022-03-31 at 12:10 AM UTC
-
2022-03-31 at 12:25 AM UTCWhen you double post you should at least try to do better the second time not worse.
-
2022-03-31 at 1:11 AM UTC
Originally posted by Number13 If you're not seeing the point you're barely more than a retard, russia is attacking a well supported equal size force to what the americans were with less troops themselves, try some basic mathematics and read some military history.
Your first sentence is a 1 sentence paragraph that is barely English.
And what high cost? the numbers put out by US intel or ukraine? you know the biased ones? in fact not even all of the western media agrees on a number and many are close to what russia themselves have been saying, right up to state affiliated media like the bbc.
If you're taking a single one of those at face value then you're helpless.
Your "source for military history" were some fake numbers from a Wikipedia article.
"High cost" isn't just troop casualties, it's financial, soft power and influence etc. It's caused russia to be more isolated and distanced from previous partners and caused Europe to pivot away from them. The ruble freefell for a few weeks and capital flight was/is rampart. Besides that, they've lost at least 7k troops (a Russian news site wrote an article stating 10k had died a week ago before taking it down) but more than that the troops are entrenched and demoralized. Generals have been killed, pilots have been captured and paraded in front of the cameras, russia has been losing the propaganda war, the economic war and can't reach their geopolitical objectives anytime soon with how things are going.
I know it's cute to be edgy and super against the mainstream like the unique little snowfake you are but when you have to grasp so hard and still be without substance, that's kind of an indication your position isn't based in reality. There is obviously a fog of war but were over a month in and russia hasn't consolidated or expanded upon their initial gains.
If you knew anything about combat you would know they're not in a desirable position. Russia will have to pay further costs to get to a position where they can realistically make some strategic gains.
Do you have ANY source for Russias efforts going according to plan and likely to result in their desired objectives in the near future?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2022-03-31 at 1:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo What? There's still no discernible point here or evidence that Russia isn't stalled and bogged down (for 3 weeks) so it's pretty clear you're just trying to be contrarian and edgy. Whatever gets you off, kid but there is no reality where the tepid progress at a very high cost has been what Russia was hoping for. Sorry reality contradicts the edgy narrative you want to substitute
No, the problem here is you're trying to measure their success by an arbitrary metric that doesn't correspond to any of their stated goals. It is not comparable to OIF; the only reason I brought it up in the first place is because western media is constantly touting the line that 'the offensive has stalled/failed because it wasn't over in a week!', as an example of how long an operation took against an overwhelmingly weaker force, using much more brutal and indiscriminate tactics. If anything it'd be a better idea to look to the Chechen Wars as an example; brutal street-to-street counterinsurgency actions with less use of standoff and air support.
This is not an operation to take or occupy land. It was never meant to be a fast operation. I don't keep track of the status of specific battles unless they're especially interesting for whatever reason (Mariupol at the moment) because information is not good enough to draw conclusions from.
Their stated goals are enforced neutrality (1) and 'denazification' (2).
1. Enforced neutrality means, essentially, destroying the modern Ukrainian military and its associated industries. This has largely been accomplished as almost the entire C4ISR structure, navy, airforce and standoff capability was obliterated inside the first 8 hours. The actual personnel (explicitly: regular military, not talking about irregular units and volunteer battalions) are still around and able to fight as independent units, but their command structure is in disarray and roughly 70% of them are trapped in the Donbass cauldron again. They'll likely be kept there until they either starve or surrender, at which point they'll be processed one way or another and the bulk of the Russian forces there will be freed up to speed up other operations.
2. 'denazification' essentially means the destruction of the current political and paramilitary power structure. This is far trickier, because we're not just talking about Azov, but specific units within the military and intelligence services as well as the political muscle behind it, groups such as PRIVYSEKTOR and SVOBODA. One of the big issues at the moment is that 'true believers' from these groups are attached to regular military units similar to commissars, so that even when the units are completely surrounded or overwhelmed with heavy fire support they are shot should they try to surrender or negotiate. We've seen this with small-town mayors who tried to negotiate with the Russian advance, and we saw it happen with that Kerch Strait provocation a few years back - two small Ukrainian gunships were ordered to sail through the strait (which is now claimed by Russia since it retook the Crimea), and when they got there were ordered to fire on the Russian patrol. The boat captains weren't suicidal and refused, and one was shot by his SVR 'minder' before they were boarded by the Russian Navy.
I think it'll become clear what they mean to do once the operation finishes up in Mariupol. They're close to mopping up Azov completely (Mariupol has been their major stronghold); according to most Russian sources I've seen they've been completely pushed out of residential areas and are now bunkered down in the old steelyards. Now that their human shields are out of the picture heavy fire support is on the table, so they're likely to have the option to surrender before the TOS-1s come rolling in.
The plan is to hold war crimes tribunals, and they've apparently got evidence of way worse stuff than has been previously published.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2022-03-31 at 1:49 AM UTCI've actually seen serious analysts toss around the idea that Russia would welcome the US or Poland to enter and take the Western part of the Ukraine, because the central and Eastern regions they've already 'demilitarised' are a wide enough DMZ to ensure Moscow's security, which was one of the two reasons they started the operation in the first place (the other one is the 'liberation' of the LDNR, and that's around 75% done)The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2022-03-31 at 1:52 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo Your first sentence is a 1 sentence paragraph that is barely English.
Your "source for military history" were some fake numbers from a Wikipedia article.
"High cost" isn't just troop casualties, it's financial, soft power and influence etc. It's caused russia to be more isolated and distanced from previous partners and caused Europe to pivot away from them. The ruble freefell for a few weeks and capital flight was/is rampart. Besides that, they've lost at least 7k troops (a Russian news site wrote an article stating 10k had died a week ago before taking it down) but more than that the troops are entrenched and demoralized. Generals have been killed, pilots have been captured and paraded in front of the cameras, russia has been losing the propaganda war, the economic war and can't reach their geopolitical objectives anytime soon with how things are going.
I know it's cute to be edgy and super against the mainstream like the unique little snowfake you are but when you have to grasp so hard and still be without substance, that's kind of an indication your position isn't based in reality. There is obviously a fog of war but were over a month in and russia hasn't consolidated or expanded upon their initial gains.
If you knew anything about combat you would know they're not in a desirable position. Russia will have to pay further costs to get to a position where they can realistically make some strategic gains.
Do you have ANY source for Russias efforts going according to plan and likely to result in their desired objectives in the near future?
Originally posted by aldra No, the problem here is you're trying to measure their success by an arbitrary metric that doesn't correspond to any of their stated goals. It is not comparable to OIF; the only reason I brought it up in the first place is because western media is constantly touting the line that 'the offensive has stalled/failed because it wasn't over in a week!', as an example of how long an operation took against an overwhelmingly weaker force, using much more brutal and indiscriminate tactics. If anything it'd be a better idea to look to the Chechen Wars as an example; brutal street-to-street counterinsurgency actions with less use of standoff and air support.
This is not an operation to take or occupy land. It was never meant to be a fast operation. I don't keep track of the status of specific battles unless they're especially interesting for whatever reason (Mariupol at the moment) because information is not good enough to draw conclusions from.
Their stated goals are enforced neutrality (1) and 'denazification' (2).
1. Enforced neutrality means, essentially, destroying the modern Ukrainian military and its associated industries. This has largely been accomplished as almost the entire C4ISR structure, navy, airforce and standoff capability was obliterated inside the first 8 hours. The actual personnel (explicitly: regular military, not talking about irregular units and volunteer battalions) are still around and able to fight as independent units, but their command structure is in disarray and roughly 70% of them are trapped in the Donbass cauldron again. They'll likely be kept there until they either starve or surrender, at which point they'll be processed one way or another and the bulk of the Russian forces there will be freed up to speed up other operations.
2. 'denazification' essentially means the destruction of the current political and paramilitary power structure. This is far trickier, because we're not just talking about Azov, but specific units within the military and intelligence services as well as the political muscle behind it, groups such as PRIVYSEKTOR and SVOBODA. One of the big issues at the moment is that 'true believers' from these groups are attached to regular military units similar to commissars, so that even when the units are completely surrounded or overwhelmed with heavy fire support they are shot should they try to surrender or negotiate. We've seen this with small-town mayors who tried to negotiate with the Russian advance, and we saw it happen with that Kerch Strait provocation a few years back - two small Ukrainian gunships were ordered to sail through the strait (which is now claimed by Russia since it retook the Crimea), and when they got there were ordered to fire on the Russian patrol. The boat captains weren't suicidal and refused, and one was shot by his SVR 'minder' before they were boarded by the Russian Navy.
I think it'll become clear what they mean to do once the operation finishes up in Mariupol. They're close to mopping up Azov completely (Mariupol has been their major stronghold); according to most Russian sources I've seen they've been completely pushed out of residential areas and are now bunkered down in the old steelyards. Now that their human shields are out of the picture heavy fire support is on the table, so they're likely to have the option to surrender before the TOS-1s come rolling in.
The plan is to hold war crimes tribunals, and they've apparently got evidence of way worse stuff than has been previously published.
Originally posted by aldra I've actually seen serious analysts toss around the idea that Russia would welcome the US or Poland to enter and take the Western part of the Ukraine, because the central and Eastern regions they've already 'demilitarised' are a wide enough DMZ to ensure Moscow's security, which was one of the two reasons they started the operation in the first place (the other one is the 'liberation' of the LDNR, and that's around 75% done)
Didn't read -
2022-03-31 at 1:53 AM UTCthis is why I rarely bother with long posts
PS. nigger -
2022-03-31 at 2:07 AM UTCSo Aldra how long do you think the war will go on for? I assume all summer at least. I'm hoping to get to Kyiv but I don't want to waste a bunch of holiday days in a locked down hellhole.
Also what do you think Ukraine will look like when this is over? Will it look like Zhirinovsky's plan?
-
2022-03-31 at 2:10 AM UTCThe average American won't even notice the difference lol
-
2022-03-31 at 2:17 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra No, the problem here is you're trying to measure their success by an arbitrary metric that doesn't correspond to any of their stated goals. It is not comparable to OIF; the only reason I brought it up in the first place is because western media is constantly touting the line that 'the offensive has stalled/failed because it wasn't over in a week!', as an example of how long an operation took against an overwhelmingly weaker force, using much more brutal and indiscriminate tactics. If anything it'd be a better idea to look to the Chechen Wars as an example; brutal street-to-street counterinsurgency actions with less use of standoff and air support.
This is not an operation to take or occupy land. It was never meant to be a fast operation. I don't keep track of the status of specific battles unless they're especially interesting for whatever reason (Mariupol at the moment) because information is not good enough to draw conclusions from.
Their stated goals are enforced neutrality (1) and 'denazification' (2).
1. Enforced neutrality means, essentially, destroying the modern Ukrainian military and its associated industries. This has largely been accomplished as almost the entire C4ISR structure, navy, airforce and standoff capability was obliterated inside the first 8 hours. The actual personnel (explicitly: regular military, not talking about irregular units and volunteer battalions) are still around and able to fight as independent units, but their command structure is in disarray and roughly 70% of them are trapped in the Donbass cauldron again. They'll likely be kept there until they either starve or surrender, at which point they'll be processed one way or another and the bulk of the Russian forces there will be freed up to speed up other operations.
2. 'denazification' essentially means the destruction of the current political and paramilitary power structure. This is far trickier, because we're not just talking about Azov, but specific units within the military and intelligence services as well as the political muscle behind it, groups such as PRIVYSEKTOR and SVOBODA. One of the big issues at the moment is that 'true believers' from these groups are attached to regular military units similar to commissars, so that even when the units are completely surrounded or overwhelmed with heavy fire support they are shot should they try to surrender or negotiate. We've seen this with small-town mayors who tried to negotiate with the Russian advance, and we saw it happen with that Kerch Strait provocation a few years back - two small Ukrainian gunships were ordered to sail through the strait (which is now claimed by Russia since it retook the Crimea), and when they got there were ordered to fire on the Russian patrol. The boat captains weren't suicidal and refused, and one was shot by his SVR 'minder' before they were boarded by the Russian Navy.
I think it'll become clear what they mean to do once the operation finishes up in Mariupol. They're close to mopping up Azov completely (Mariupol has been their major stronghold); according to most Russian sources I've seen they've been completely pushed out of residential areas and are now bunkered down in the old steelyards. Now that their human shields are out of the picture heavy fire support is on the table, so they're likely to have the option to surrender before the TOS-1s come rolling in.
The plan is to hold war crimes tribunals, and they've apparently got evidence of way worse stuff than has been previously published.
All my posts today have been attempts to provoke you to make a long post. False fagposts if you will
Stated goals are obviously only important to people with a passing observation of the conflict or who are trying to control the narrative. We both know that neutrality is a legitimate goal (which should be already assured with their nuclear disarm treaty) and "denazification" is only stated as a pretext for changing and destroying political structures (which so far they've only succeeded in having parties with ties to Russia expelled and banned). Now they can say they just really wanted to kick the nazis out-of mariupol and that mission has been accomplished. There are obviously much bigger and more important goals
They want Crimea officially as well as some recognition of donbass as something other than hostile oblasts. They want to control the dniper River as well, the ability to cut off thr black sea and ideally the Odessa port. They want more money and people in Russia too snd they're not succeeding in this (although there have been refugees)
If Russia just wanted neutrality and some nazi parties out they would have gotten that within a few days. The longer it goes on the worse the optics are too and the higher the cost. By all estimates the Russian infantry have underperformed and there have been issues with logistics and coordination.
Also, the port/steelyards have been the last places to sweep through for a reason: Russia doesn't want to ruin it and fuck up their logistics situation again. They need the port for many reasons and will likely integrate mariupol into the DPR and use "denazification" as a pretext for holding on. Like come on, you know how "nazi" is a dogwhistle, especially for Russians, you can't actually believe the nazis in Ukraine are worth invading over.
Having Russian institutions entrenched in Ukraine is likely part of this "denazification" and they've only succeeded in having people hate Russia. At this rate a week after russia withdraws with their tail between their legs kids will be goose stepping and using "russian" as an ethnic slur and the whole world will cheer them on -
2022-03-31 at 2:17 AM UTC
Originally posted by Donald Trump So Aldra how long do you think the war will go on for? I assume all summer at least. I'm hoping to get to Kyiv but I don't want to waste a bunch of holiday days in a locked down hellhole.
couldn't say, I don't like any of the information I have enough to make predictions, but yeah I think it'll be a slog.
it's ok though, you don't need to go to Kyiv
Kyiv will come to you
Originally posted by Donald Trump Also what do you think Ukraine will look like when this is over? Will it look like Zhirinovsky's plan?
lol unironically seems likely to me, I don't think Russia will actually directly stake a claim further than the LDNR but they now have a policy of bringing in their own regional administrators when towns surrender (they previously left them to their own devices but Azov and pals were coming back and hooking into local politics after the Red Army moves on) so they are now being 'tainted' with Russian policyThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2022-03-31 at 2:29 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo All my posts today have been attempts to provoke you to make a long post
I've had kobold and ran out of durgs at the same time
I'm not sure which did it but I've mostly just been talking nonsense these last few days, like trying to explain to strangers why that guy who tried to run a train into a hospital ship was so cool
will try and get some more down later
PS. Martyanov posted a video from a professional Russian military analyst explaining the state of the operation in technical terms but there's no english translation yet, I'll repost it if I can find oneThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2022-03-31 at 5:47 AM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo Your first sentence is a 1 sentence paragraph that is barely English.
Your "source for military history" were some fake numbers from a Wikipedia article.
"High cost" isn't just troop casualties, it's financial, soft power and influence etc. It's caused russia to be more isolated and distanced from previous partners and caused Europe to pivot away from them. The ruble freefell for a few weeks and capital flight was/is rampart. Besides that, they've lost at least 7k troops (a Russian news site wrote an article stating 10k had died a week ago before taking it down) but more than that the troops are entrenched and demoralized. Generals have been killed, pilots have been captured and paraded in front of the cameras, russia has been losing the propaganda war, the economic war and can't reach their geopolitical objectives anytime soon with how things are going.
I know it's cute to be edgy and super against the mainstream like the unique little snowfake you are but when you have to grasp so hard and still be without substance, that's kind of an indication your position isn't based in reality. There is obviously a fog of war but were over a month in and russia hasn't consolidated or expanded upon their initial gains.
If you knew anything about combat you would know they're not in a desirable position. Russia will have to pay further costs to get to a position where they can realistically make some strategic gains.
Do you have ANY source for Russias efforts going according to plan and likely to result in their desired objectives in the near future?
Do you have any source that they're not except supposition? Argument presented without evidence requires no evidence to refute.
Besides which you're missing the point entirely, probably deliberately.
-They know the power of ukraine
-They would have planned from the start to meet resistance
-Nobody plans for the battle to go perfectly and to meet all objectives day one, that's retarded
-They haven't got a numbers advantage, and at best their training and equipment are only slightly better (or worse in the case of infantry weapons)
-The US would never pass up a chance to interfere and vassal states always go along with them
All of that was known from before the war started, which means it was known to the russian state before the war
If it's not something you can understand that wars aren't quick then I don't know what to tell you
Edit: Ah shit Aldra already said most of what I meant before this, I'll read all I missed fully next time. -
2022-03-31 at 1:10 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra PS. Martyanov posted a video from a professional Russian military analyst explaining the state of the operation in technical terms but there's no english translation yet, I'll repost it if I can find one
how do you know smoothix isnt propagandizing for russia ?
why do you trust his analysists ? -
2022-03-31 at 1:11 PM UTC
-
2022-03-31 at 1:17 PM UTC
Originally posted by Sudo "High cost" isn't just troop casualties, it's financial, soft power and influence etc. It's caused russia to be more isolated and distanced from previous partners and caused Europe to pivot away from them.
really ? have you seen the map of the 'coalition of the sanctioning' ? specifically thr ''international community'' that backs it.The ruble freefell for a few weeks and capital flight was/is rampart.
good. these are known side effects of vaccination against the dollar supremacy. now russia will be totally immune to weaponized dollar.Besides that, they've lost at least 7k troops (a Russian news site wrote an article stating 10k had died a week ago before taking it down) but more than that the troops are entrenched and demoralized. Generals have been killed, pilots have been captured and paraded in front of the cameras, russia has been losing the propaganda war, the economic war and can't reach their geopolitical objectives anytime soon with how things are going.
objection. hear-say.
bottom line: russia have china on its side.
and thats all that matters. -
2022-03-31 at 1:19 PM UTC
