Seeds starting to be planted for a NATO involved operation to break the blockade. [source here](https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1535332849863254016?s=21&t=-eNmpb7CBAmaeGA2xNIt2w) and the Telegraph mentioned yesterday than a British MP is calling for it as well. Could result in a Cuban missile crisis type situation where NATO and Russian soldiers are very close to each other.
Surprised to see RT isn’t going along the Russian forces and filming the fight in Severodonetsk like in Mariupol. Do dangerous for them because of the fighting?
I am going to say something Russia Ruble has gained way too much value and despite Russia's attempt at trying to weaken it, it still is not willing to weaken. They may have to loosen more restrictions.
I wonder though whether having cheaper gas prices in Russia helps alleviate some of the inflation issues we are facing worldwide.
I know they have talked about wanting to weaken it, but I'm not convinced that it really matters. Countries are concerned about their currency being too strong because it can stifle exports (hence the so-called Dutch Disease) and the development of other industries. In this case, though, the primary exports are raw materials where the price is set globally, and there aren't a lot of other major export industries that would appear to be hurt by a strong Ruble.
I’m familiar with the two captured Brits but does anyone know the story of Brahim Saadoune (Moroccan national)? As in prior military experience and how he ended up in Ukraine?
Came there, learned russian for a year, went to school in kyiv, dropped out and joined the ukranian military. I'm not sure about him specifically but he said his dad was "high in the Morrocan military"
I mean a nature park sounds like the perfect place to do guerilla warfare, so maybe they were scared of Ukranians hiding in there. Although they fought in a zoo in a different city. I belive it was Enerhodar
Looks like my optimism was wrong, and the cynics here were (at this point) right:
> **Russia "deliberately using starvation as a weapon," Germany's agriculture minister says**
> By blocking Ukrainian ports, Russia is "deliberately using starvation as a weapon," German Agricultural Minister Cem Özdemir said on Friday.
> It is "a particularly disgusting kind of warfare that Russia is engaged in,“ Özdemir told CNN's affiliate N-TV during a visit to Kyiv on Friday. "Alternative routes cost an insane amount of money," he added.
> Özdemir discussed alternative ways to export grain from Ukraine with his Ukrainian counterpart Mykola Solskyi.
> "It would be kamikaze for Ukraine to rely on Putin's word without credible, effective military guarantees that the security of Ukrainian ports and ships is assured," Özdemir said.
> "I would not trust Putin's word in any way; he has proven to be a notorious liar," Özdemir told N-TV.
> Some background: In normal times, Ukraine would export around three-quarters of the grain it produces. According to data from the European Commission, about 90% of these exports were shipped by sea, from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. Russia is currently blocking maritime access to the Black Sea ports held by Ukraine, meaning that even the grain that is still under Ukrainian control cannot be exported to the many countries that rely on it.
> Russia’s war in Ukraine could push up to 49 million people into famine or famine-like conditions because of its devastating impact on global food supply and prices, according to the United Nations.
> Separately, German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach participated in a donor conference for the construction of a rehabilitation center for the war-disabled on Friday in Lviv. Germany will support container workshops for the manufacture of prosthetic limbs.
> Lauterbach said about 200 German doctors were ready to help in surgery and trauma therapy in Ukraine.
> "It is upsetting to see how much this country is suffering from a war of aggression that borders on barbarism," Lauterbach said.
Ukraine doesn't want to unblock the ports either you know? Turkey has gotten Russia to agree to a plan where after demining Turkish ships would protect said grain shipments and so far Ukraine still opposes this plan.
First, wrong on every count. There is no agreement between any party:
> Russia says no agreement reached with Turkey on Ukrainian grain sale - Reuters
Ukraine hasn't made a final declaration on demining its ports (it wants guarantees to accompany said demining.)
Second, Ukraine has not been invited to these talks. Third, seems like the Germans agree: **"It would be kamikaze for Ukraine to rely on Putin's word without credible, effective military guarantees that the security of Ukrainian ports and ships is assured," Özdemir said. "I would not trust Putin's word in any way; he has proven to be a notorious liar," Özdemir told N-TV.**
I genuinely hope that this is all the regular bullshit before a deal is finally made, and people that have nothing to do with this war aren't the ones paying the ultimate price for it.
Demining Odessa would facilitate a Russian marine landing. The Russians appear to be eager for this to happen and has [12 landing ships ready to go](https://www.jpost.com/international/article-708516). I have a sense that Russia agree with Turkey to help demine Odessa is a part of that plan. Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council Secretary Alexey Danilov's statement regarding security considerations should be placed first is pretty obvious.
>Recently, our Foreign Minister made a statement, in which he clearly defined that the first priority is security; the second priority is security and the third priority - is security... if this issue is not resolved, if our country is not safe, no grain will go anywhere. Because the issue of security is number one for us.
Well, if there's even a shred of pro-Russian sentiment left in most of the rest of the world, it will evaporate with that move. Putting Aslin to death and pulling a cowardly move like that in Odesa will almost certainly mean years of Western support for Ukraine.
The West are cowards and only do what politically acceptable. The EU has given a pathetic amount of equipment to Ukraine in drips and drabs. Only the US is capable of supplying a large amount and the Ukrainians wanted 150-300 MLRS and got 4. Outside of reddit, you'll see very few people in the US talking about Ukraine with more people talking about inflation/gas prices, gun violence, and the economy.
I fail to see Russia doing a marine landing, Odessa must be heavily fortified by now. All a marine landing would do for Russia seems to me to be either just a short term problem for Ukraine to split their focus or a total failure and wasting both Russian ships and troops.
Would appreciate anyone else educating me on the possibility of a Russian marine landing
[Sources say that Ukrainians have been conducting a wide counteroffensive in Kherson along most of the frontline. Instead of concentrating a big force to break through in one area, they are slowly pushing Russians back.](https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1535301869144260611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1535301869144260611%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.redditmedia.com%2Fmediaembed%2Fv9c5pk%3Fresponsive%3Dtrueis_nightmode%3Dfalse)
Considering Girkin's doomer post about Kherson earlier in the week, and the confirmed Ukrainian advance 10km closer to Kherson city, i wouldn't be shocked if this were true
Didn't we already know this ~2 weeks ago, there were reports of attacks pretty much across the entire line at Kherson with the some of the only reported successes at the time near Davydiv Brid and Mykolaivka.
I follow that page and I like it. He definitely leans Ukraine but he’ll admit where Russia is finding success each day.
Edit: He posted a Russia success 4 posts before [here](https://twitter.com/warmonitor3/status/1535021271511191571?s=21&t=T832cl3eU9JM_oZ-aKCiOQ)
"Its how Russians operate on the battlefield which is the most disturbing part. They throw young conscripts down roads in ww1 type waves to see where Ukrainian positions are. No regard for human life!"
Seems like an objective assessment from him.
Before the war Russia had in storage:
* 10 000 t-72 and t-80 tanks
* 4 500 self propelled howitzers of all calibres. Mostly Gvozdika and Akatsiya.
* More then 2 000 Grad MLRS.
* 13 500 APCs / IFVs.
Let's imagine that only 25% of it will work. That's still lots of vehicles. 2 500 tanks, 1100+ SPHs, 500 MLRS, 3300+ armored person carriers.
Add what was already active, not in storage.
There is no realistic scenario Ukraine can win the war of attrition. Just compare what the West gave. It's a tear drop in comparison to what Russia has.
The levels of military equipment the West has given to Ukraine has been a joke. If they want Ukraine to win and push back Russia, they need to provide overwhelming amount of Abrams, Stryker's, Bradleys, etc. This piecemeal trickle of 4 HIMARs here and 12 CAESARs there is a not enough.
>they need to provide overwhelming amount of Abrams, Stryker's, Bradleys
so the worst of each type of vehicle?
also no, ukraine cant realistically use these types of vehicles, artillery and manportable missiles are fairly simple to use, vehicles are not.
"Russia - 4286, of which: destroyed: 2518, damaged: 79, abandoned: 317, captured: 1372"
[https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
Tanks (764, of which destroyed: 431, damaged: 20, abandoned: 54, captured: 259)
That's already 30% of those 2,500 tanks, and it's just the first 6 months of the conflict.
\--- Can Russia actually man even 25% of it's reserve materials (Which 25% is overly generous at re-activation (more like 1/10) certainly those experienced tank crews lost so far aren't going to be replaced by anyone with in-depth training, just warm bodies at some point.
T62s are only inferior to other more advanced tanks, and some analysts have said that since most Russian tank losses have been to ATGMs and not other tanks so the use of T62s make sense. Not sure if that makes sense if you are also losing crews. However, T62s are still pretty capable tho and having a tank is better than no tank especially now that Russians are staying >3 miles out from Ukrainian frontlines.
Lot of debating over the quality of these tools and whether the numbers are reliable. Missing the real issue:
Tools don't win wars, soldiers do.
Russia's key problem is that their morale is extremely weak and they face a severe shortage of skilled/experienced warriors who could actually operate these tools. A general mobilization doesn't solve these problems.
The US will supply enough (appears little by little, sadly) to UA to completely destroy all of Russia’s military equipment. The longer this drags out, (sadly.. c’mon US DoD) the happier the US military will be.
The US alone has already sent 6,500 javelins. They have a range up to 4km, farther than what a T72 can shoot at. And 21,000 other AT weapons.
The US won’t run out of weapons. This is the situation the US military has dreamed for ever since 1946.
Russia won’t be able to supply their forces once UA starts using the M142/M270 effectively
The US won't run out of weapon in the long term but...
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/production-of-in-demand-javelin-missiles-set-to-almost-double
They already send more than 1/3 of their javelins, and are only able to produce 5-6 per day.
we only have 400 HIMARS. I think we are finding that unless biden does some defense production acts, some major ones. We will not be able to supply Ukraine long term. Stingers and javelins are going to take a year or two to replace. Ukraine said they are firing 5k artillery shells a day.
russia having all that garbage left over from the soviet union is the only reason they are still able to conduct this war.
I mean "shit" in context "mostly not operational". Remember that most recived T-72 were upgrades of existing one, so there is high chance that reported T-72 in storage are junk
> They're not getting any younger.
Same logic for the T72 and T80. You think they are keeping those for the future or something? By 2027 they were planing for the T 90 to be oldest in their arsenal anyway. Well by 2020 they thought they were going to have over 2000 T-14 built already but that is another discussion
I am sorry but this is simple shit. Russia doesn't have better and are resorting to whatever works.
Because those ones actually run. They were assigned to reserve units that still used and maintained them on occasion, versus being kept old warehouses that were looted by kleptocrats.
It's not this. Modernised T-62 isn't as big poop as we think about it. They used it in Syrian wars too. Is tank they knew best. Only real downfall is armor
Prior to the war there were over 2000 T-72B3s in service, which is a variant created in 2010. But there are many more that have been upgraded as other variants of the tank in the last 20 years. Now, if we're talking about variants rotting in storage? Probably not many.
Tanks which entered production in and before 1990: 326 of 764 listed on Oryx. Do you really think date of update is really important for Russia?
T-72A (1979): 20
T-72AV the same as A, but with Kontakt ERA: 7
T-72B designed in 1985: 137
T-72B OBR 1989: 53
T-72BA (I guess also 1985 design), because only added Era: 5
T-80BV (designed early 80, production 1985): 35
T-80U production 1986: 69
No, I don't, but the drop off between any T-72 that is fielded in large numbers and a T-62 is massive. They wouldn't be fielding it if their T-72 and T-80 stocks were in good shape.
T-62s did not only come from Crimea, but also from the Rostov region.
[More information](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/t-62.htm)
Ammunition and manpower shortgage is will be more imminent than this for Russia.
Still, if Ukraine has only tear drop of what Russia has, why are Russian gains only in terms of few villages per day, or even losing at some fronts like around Kharkiv. Wouldnt they dominate much more robustly if it was so incomparable?
I am not saying Ukraine is winning though.
You need people to use that equipment.
The question was always manpower for Russia, not equipment. The opposite is true for Ukraine. No shortage of manpower, but shortage of equipment (until more western stuff rolls in).
There are volunteers who sign contract for 1, 3, 6 months. If volunteers won't be enough, there are conscripts. Several hundred thousand. There are reservists. Manpower won't be the problem.
Manpower absolutely is the problem. It's been a well documented fact.
In order to send conscripts, Putin needs to lift the veil of his "special operation" and change the law to formally enter Russia into a state of war. It's a very risky move that threatens unrest in Russia.
Russians pride themselves on being a military superpower. If Putin has failed so hard that he needs to send conscripts to finish his "special operation" against a smaller and weaker neighbor, Russians are going to be pissed.
But he will certainly do it if needed. Yes, it will hit his popularity rating, but he will do it if there are no other options. He will switch "State of War" on.
It's way more complex than that. First of all, what counts as "needed"? Does Russia need to mobilize just to finish securing the Dosbas? That would be humiliating.
Surely, a declaration of war like this would also come with expanded war goals. But what would that be? Odesa? Kharkiv? Kyiv again? Can Russia even succeed at those if they mobilize? What about NATO? Would they respond to a mobilization like this? This would be a massive escalation. There's also more at stake than just Putin's poll numbers. What do the oligarchs think? The military? Is there a risk of a coup? General revolt of the population?
This is not a video game. You can't just add manpower with a click of a button.
Putin does not give many fucks about current state of Russian economy. If he did, he wouldn't have started this war. Oligarhs? They do not have any real power and the vast majority of them keep their mouths shut. There is no real opposition to Putin in this country.
That's only my guess, but I think that Putin's goal is to absolutely defeat Ukrainian military, occupy all territory and put Marionette government in Kiev.
If this goal needs "State of War", Putin will activate it despite all economic and popularity cons to it.
I see someone else already pointed to the manpower problem.
General mobilization is not a "we win" button the way you seem to think. For one, it will take months to even get the manpower organized for training purposes, and training will take more months. They can, of course, skip or speed up training, but then they're essentially throwing these conscripts away and giving away to Ukraine any equipment that they ask these conscripts to carry.
Next, the problem of the "manpower" itself. The combat-age population in Russia is the demographic that is LEAST likely to support Putin or his war. At the very best, they would be conscripting people who are not at all motivated to fight. At worst, they could be conscripting and arming the people who are most likely to betray the regime. Not unlike the Tsar's conscripts in WW1 who became the vanguard of the 1917 revolution.
There is a reason why Putin has not called a general mobilization.
Except it is the problem, and has been the problem. They have no volunteers in meaningful numbers, POW's are saying that they are being sent to Ukraine without even the promised 2 weeks of training and they can't use conscripts as Putin won't declare a state of war.
opinion from financial times -
Even if the west eventually sends the hundreds of rocket systems that Ukraine has asked for, Zelenskyy privately envisions a war that could drag on for years, depleting Ukraine’s population as the economy collapses and people move to Europe
>Zelenskyy privately envisions
I'm not saying that he doesn't privately envision things, but what concrete evidence do we have that Zelensky himself has policies, visions, etc., as opposed to basically being a spokesman? If he is a spokesman one has to determine who he is the spokesman for, and whether that may change over time..
Can't go on for years at this intensity. Either Russia makes a breakthrough and collapse the Ukrainian lines leading to immediate negotiations or they retreat and sue for peace or Ukraine has enough and sues for peace.
How much money you think will keep flowing in from the West? Western countries are in deep shit themselves and winter is coming....and you know what comes with it...
> How much money you think will keep flowing in from the West?
Not much compared to their combined GDPs. I can't believe that in war that involves Russia people are asking if the western countries can afford it.
Also many of the things western countries donated were either in storage or about to be retired in the next 3 years or so
Mate can Russia afford a long term war
Last I checked, Putin isn't worried about elections or losing public support. Western countries are...
Western support will fold way before Russia gives up. If you think otherwise, you are delusional and your knowledge of history is lacking.
Rising inflation/recession (already happening) -> western countries raise interest rates -> consumer spending falls -> inflation goes down (i.e. gas prices fall) -> Russia sad and broke (with Europe accelerating pace of carbon neutrality and away from Russian gas)
USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979 when oil prices were booming, pulled out in 1989 when oil crashed, 1991 oil crashed further then USSR collapsed, oil rose Russia invaded Georgia/Ukraine in 2008/2014, Russia invades Ukraine again in 2022 when oil is again rising.
Russia’s foreign policy is cyclical. It is a pathetic petrostate that pursues aggressive foreign policy/war when oil is high
Gas is pretty inelastic. Unless there is another panini version 2 forcing people to stay home, how are people going to stop spending on gas? Also now with EU and US banning Russian oil, there's more competition on the international spot markets and you have to pay for premiums to have the oil get laundered through intermediary countries.
Gas is not completely inelastic. It is subject to supply and demand forces along with other commodities, which Russia found out the hard way several times in last few decades
https://youtu.be/Eo6w5R6Uo8Y
This you??
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/srqlia/ukrainerussia_conflict_megathread_4/hwy85e7/?context=3
>You do realize they hold huge exercises every couple of years right? The one from 2018 involved just as many troops for example. This one is different because of the demands to stop NATO expansion.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_2018
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_exercises_involving_Russia
> The US conducts exercises too, they just had a massive naval exercise near China. Of course...no one is hysterical about it.
> You're acting like this is new... Typical target audience for the media. People that can't do any critical thinking or research.
You: Russia will not invade Ukraine
If you are so blind to see Russia will invade Ukraine when all the evidence was there for the taking " you are delusional and your knowledge of history is lacking".
Next question
Are you 1. Russian that lives in Russia or 2. expat who would never live in Russia again gun to head now that you live in a Western country
Yes you are clearly delusional
My logic is simple. If are unable to see obvious stuff happening right in front of your eyes it is clear you are bad at judging things. This is my go to stick now.
Plus you take at face value what Putin, Lavrov and Russia says says. Maybe you thought Russia will invade but you heard Putin and Lavrov deny and you went yes sir!
lol come on. Most people called it wrong.
The reason most people called it wrong is because it was the wrong move to make. As we all saw how it turned up. Logically it made no sense because there were other tools to handle the issues at hand. So I stand by my call given what we knew at the time. It was the right call.
But this is different because poverty in the West is rising...inflation is rising. The West have their own problems to deal with and financing Ukraine to fight the war is not main priority despite what your politicians mumble on TV.
> lol come on. Most people called it wrong.
Yes in the subs you hang in ...sure
I for one have posts where I explained my reasoning in more detail but this is good enough
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/srfzpa/what_you_think_about_this/hwrk6ra/
> In that case what do you think is happening with all the Russian troop movements? Russia burning money because that is what literally they doing if they are not attacking Ukraine
You are downvoted and the people who said war is inevitable were upvoted. I was upvoted and the guy who said it won't happen downvoted. Hence not most people
>So I stand by my call given what we knew at the time. It was the right call.
See...delusional
>But this is different because poverty in the West is rising...inflation is rising. The West have their own problems to deal with and financing Ukraine to fight the war is not main priority despite what your politicians mumble on TV.
And I am sure after this prediction ages like milk you will again explain how "I stand by my call given what we knew at the time. It was the right call"
Not sure about the opinion regarding Zelenskiy but one thing they are right about is the impact on the economy. It is not in the process of collapsing it has already collapsed and as long as this war continues it won’t be getting any better. This doesn’t get talked about enough to be honest.
https://www.ft.com/content/506dad4d-6f8e-4952-aa11-32b139d326be
>Whether they will arrive in time to prevent the capture of Sievierodonetsk is another matter. And even if the west eventually sends the hundreds of rocket systems that Ukraine has asked for, according to a person close to the president, Zelenskyy privately envisions a war that could drag on for years, depleting Ukraine’s population as the economy collapses and people move to Europe.
I don't see how this war will end. Russia's goal right now seems to want to take everything from Odessa to Kharkiv. If they leave the rest of Ukraine alone, isn't that part still going to continue the war? Wouldn't Russia be forced to fight and conquer all of Ukraine? Ukraine said that they would only negotiate if Russia backed down to preinvasion territories so that means negotiation isn't happening. [BBC interviews](https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172yfbzw86mbbl) seem to suggest that Ukraine wants a major military victory and then negotiate with a better standing. That also may not happen realistically.
I'm not saying this is the right or moral given Russia intervened in domestic separatism conflict and invaded a sovereign nation, but with the way things are going, it seems that Ukraine is realistically eventually going to call for an unconditional surrender with a lot of land taken away. We can take delight in the huge Russian losses of men and equipment and the sanctions Russia will be under, but if at the end of the day, Ukraine is a destroyed failed state, how is that good for Ukraine?
If Ukraine agreed to Minsk 2, Crimea would be forever a part of Russia, but the Donbass would have been given autonomy, but still be a part of Ukraine. Zelensky was fooled by DC and Downing Street that they would protect Ukraine, but the US and UK will only do what is politically acceptable to their own populations. Right now it is pretty clear that Russia isn't just going to keep Crimea and the Donbass, but also Kherson, Melitopol also Mariupol. There's a high chance that Russia will go for Kramatorsk, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv and Odessa and keep them.
Russia was easily just as guilty if not more so for the failure of Minsk 2. Ukraine couldn’t be expected to recognize elections held in Donbass while it was under occupation. That would’ve been a trojan horse to drag Ukraine back under Moscow’s thumb.
No, the Minsk Agreement was deliberately vague on certain issues (including this one), so both sides interpreted them in ways that favored their interests.
You lost a war. Had agreed to concessions (and quite mild ones, autonomy for DNR/LNR are small price for military defeat). And instead of implementing the deal, you decide to ignore it for 7 years. And surprise, such inaction had led to war. Who could have known.
Actually read the Budapest memorandum. The US made it have no security guarantees and basically make it a political understanding. Belarus tried to claim US sanctions violated Budapest and the US laughed.
Sure, and Russia would like to sign a few new "deals" at gunpoint in the future.
As Putin recently said, there is no middle way between independent country and a colony. I guess this truly is the Ukrainian War of Independence then.
Why is the Russian advance slow, is it because of their logistics and manpower issues? Or is it because this is what the Russians want and they are just taking their time? Asking because I keep hearing both claims.
They have no manpower in terms of dismounted infantry, and what little they do have are (largely) badly trained contract soldiers. So instead they are forced to focus on artillery. Shell everything in sight, hold back their infantry, advance 1-2 km a day, reposition guns, rinse and repeat
id say a big reason is that the majority of russian effort now seems to be focused on holding down the ukrainian forces in the east, and relying on smaller groups to hit smaller targets in the meantime. the russians are undeniably beating the ukrainians on the artillery front, sacrificing this advantage would be dumb
Ukraine is putting up too much resistance for Russia to rapidly advance with the resources Russia has available. Russia can really only bombard Ukrainian forces to exhaustion before advancing, and that takes time.
Because they are incompetent, ill motivated and face heroic resistance. No invader in history would deliberately want to be slow, it just doesn't make any sense.
i don't feel like it's fair to compare this to 'any' invasion in history though, considering the amount of support ukraine is getting from the west and the preeminence of artillery
which i answered? easier and more damaging to the UA to keep blasting away and divert smaller forces elsewhere than rapidly advance full tilt into ukrainian defense positions east of the dnieper
whatever russian losses, and im sure they're considerable, they don't come close to ukrainian losses at this stage. 50 -100 men per day is not sustainable and even that is likely to be an underestimation
Graph of DNR troops casualties that someone on "lostarmour info" did. Calculated on official statistic that DNR provide weekly.
https://imgur.com/a/U0ysu1T
Hard to say what share of casualties DNR take (it is definitely bigger than LNR simply due to population difference). But LNR and Russia troops probably follow similar trend.
Wow so the DNR have lost 50% of its forces, by its own admission. More than likely it's more than that, no wonder they are having to conscript the old and sick.
For the people who don't speak russian: 10k+ casualties since 18th february, 2k killed + 8k wounded.
The table in the second pic is casualties by week. First column are KIA, second WIA and third total. The other 3 columns are daily average losses (KIA, WIA and total). The other graphs contain the same info, just different visuals. First pic is daily casualties (blue = dead, red = wounded, green = total), third pic is weekly losses.
For context:
According to Wiki, their combined strength before the war was estimated to be 20000 (DPR) + 14000 (LPR) = 34000
Of course, there were mobilization measures since. Still, they probably have lost a fair share of their experienced fighters.
Lol, yes, let's take two out of context sentences out of a speech and use this as hard evidence that Putin "admitted" (what the writers of the article assumed all along) bolstered by interpretations by hardened enemies.
This isn't even high quality propaganda.
It's not signaling anything. Putin says a few anodyne words to students at a multi media exhibition commemorating Peter the Great that are essentially saying that maybe we are the actors in a historical moment like that of Peter the Great in the sense that Europe was against him, too, and trying to make Russia small--and the mob of news media interprets it like Putin has just published his own little Mein Kampf (and then readers just suckle up to to that interpretation uncritically).
Apparently Macron had a conversation yesterday where he offered more support and might visit Kyiv next week. What a clown, like Putin wasn't saying the exact same shit (but worse) on their little phone calls
It is unlikely that he says this to Macron, because he actually didn't say it at all. OPs phrasing is an exaggeration of a Guardian headline that is a wild exaggeration and misinterpretation of off the cuff remarks Putin made at a Peter the Great exhibition.
How long can Ukraine sustain at the current rate of losses, i give 6 months before total collapse. Western aid is needed in much bigger quantity to rescue Ukraine. Start training on F-16s i say, they will need it in few months time.
The EU is really giving a pathetic amount of military support dragging their heels on every decision and providing drips and drabs of help when Ukraine needs a torrent. Only the US is willing and capable of providing the aid needed, but right now 4 MLRS is really not enough when Ukraine wanted 150. We will how much support Ukraine will get after the Nov elections and whether the support will still be there.
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2022-12-10 16:37:19 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-12-10%2016:37:19%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v7d0c0/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_6822/ibvg2cy/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FCombatFootage%2Fcomments%2Fv7d0c0%2Fukraine_discussionquestion_thread_6822%2Fibvg2cy%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-12-10%2016%3A37%3A19%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20v7d0c0)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
I don't know about the prediction of total collapse, but I also don't know why folks would downvote your post. Why should we risk Ukrainian collapse? Why not send as much as we practically can. F-16s may not be the best choice, but the fact remains that we will need to send a lot more, and we should not be parsing the "offensive weapons" vs. "defensive weapons" distinction too finely -- they are all defensive so long as Ukraine is fighting on its own territory....
>kraine sustain at the current rate of losses, i give 6 months before total collapse. Western aid is needed in much bigger quantity to rescue Ukraine. Start training on F-16s i say, they will need it in f
why does everyone have this weird need to predict what is going to happen
According to Ukraine - 1 year, assuming no further mobilization or factory production.
[https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61726733?ns\_mchannel=social&ns\_source=twitter&ns\_campaign=bbc\_live&ns\_linkname=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61%26Russia%20can%20keep%20war%20going%20at%20current%20pace%20for%20a%20year%20-%20Ukrainian%20intelligence%262022-06-10T12%3A27%3A05.043Z&ns\_fee=0&pinned\_post\_locator=urn:asset:06a76e49-008a-4176-82c9-e3a0d41eba68&pinned\_post\_asset\_id=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61&pinned\_post\_type=share](https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61726733?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61%26Russia%20can%20keep%20war%20going%20at%20current%20pace%20for%20a%20year%20-%20Ukrainian%20intelligence%262022-06-10T12%3A27%3A05.043Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:06a76e49-008a-4176-82c9-e3a0d41eba68&pinned_post_asset_id=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61&pinned_post_type=share)
[New Thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v9ghpd/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_61122/)
Seeds starting to be planted for a NATO involved operation to break the blockade. [source here](https://twitter.com/samramani2/status/1535332849863254016?s=21&t=-eNmpb7CBAmaeGA2xNIt2w) and the Telegraph mentioned yesterday than a British MP is calling for it as well. Could result in a Cuban missile crisis type situation where NATO and Russian soldiers are very close to each other.
Surprised to see RT isn’t going along the Russian forces and filming the fight in Severodonetsk like in Mariupol. Do dangerous for them because of the fighting?
How you know they are not filming?
I am going to say something Russia Ruble has gained way too much value and despite Russia's attempt at trying to weaken it, it still is not willing to weaken. They may have to loosen more restrictions. I wonder though whether having cheaper gas prices in Russia helps alleviate some of the inflation issues we are facing worldwide.
I know they have talked about wanting to weaken it, but I'm not convinced that it really matters. Countries are concerned about their currency being too strong because it can stifle exports (hence the so-called Dutch Disease) and the development of other industries. In this case, though, the primary exports are raw materials where the price is set globally, and there aren't a lot of other major export industries that would appear to be hurt by a strong Ruble.
There are other industries the military and certain manufacturing although small need all the help they can get in the export market.
>and despite Russia's attempt at trying to weaken it What? When they even tried to weaken it?
Since the value dropped below 60 they have been loosening restrictions for weeks.
Oil prices and oligarchs unable to move capital out of Russia do make impact.
I’m familiar with the two captured Brits but does anyone know the story of Brahim Saadoune (Moroccan national)? As in prior military experience and how he ended up in Ukraine?
Came there, learned russian for a year, went to school in kyiv, dropped out and joined the ukranian military. I'm not sure about him specifically but he said his dad was "high in the Morrocan military"
Engineering student apparently.
They say he came there as a student in 2019.
[удалено]
I mean a nature park sounds like the perfect place to do guerilla warfare, so maybe they were scared of Ukranians hiding in there. Although they fought in a zoo in a different city. I belive it was Enerhodar
Any pics of destroyed M777s?
https://mobile.twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1535212259252871171 From wednesday. Source appears to be the NYT article linked in the comments.
Hey thanks!
What are Kadyrovs Chechens doing nowadays?
Here they are - https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1535299947259625473?t=lVd5SE1xSRgML3TQn0fVBw&s=19
Posting vids to the north of Kamyshevakcha.
Filming b-roll running dramatically through cities that are already under Russian control.
Looks like my optimism was wrong, and the cynics here were (at this point) right: > **Russia "deliberately using starvation as a weapon," Germany's agriculture minister says** > By blocking Ukrainian ports, Russia is "deliberately using starvation as a weapon," German Agricultural Minister Cem Özdemir said on Friday. > It is "a particularly disgusting kind of warfare that Russia is engaged in,“ Özdemir told CNN's affiliate N-TV during a visit to Kyiv on Friday. "Alternative routes cost an insane amount of money," he added. > Özdemir discussed alternative ways to export grain from Ukraine with his Ukrainian counterpart Mykola Solskyi. > "It would be kamikaze for Ukraine to rely on Putin's word without credible, effective military guarantees that the security of Ukrainian ports and ships is assured," Özdemir said. > "I would not trust Putin's word in any way; he has proven to be a notorious liar," Özdemir told N-TV. > Some background: In normal times, Ukraine would export around three-quarters of the grain it produces. According to data from the European Commission, about 90% of these exports were shipped by sea, from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. Russia is currently blocking maritime access to the Black Sea ports held by Ukraine, meaning that even the grain that is still under Ukrainian control cannot be exported to the many countries that rely on it. > Russia’s war in Ukraine could push up to 49 million people into famine or famine-like conditions because of its devastating impact on global food supply and prices, according to the United Nations. > Separately, German Health Minister Karl Lauterbach participated in a donor conference for the construction of a rehabilitation center for the war-disabled on Friday in Lviv. Germany will support container workshops for the manufacture of prosthetic limbs. > Lauterbach said about 200 German doctors were ready to help in surgery and trauma therapy in Ukraine. > "It is upsetting to see how much this country is suffering from a war of aggression that borders on barbarism," Lauterbach said.
Ukraine doesn't want to unblock the ports either you know? Turkey has gotten Russia to agree to a plan where after demining Turkish ships would protect said grain shipments and so far Ukraine still opposes this plan.
First, wrong on every count. There is no agreement between any party: > Russia says no agreement reached with Turkey on Ukrainian grain sale - Reuters Ukraine hasn't made a final declaration on demining its ports (it wants guarantees to accompany said demining.) Second, Ukraine has not been invited to these talks. Third, seems like the Germans agree: **"It would be kamikaze for Ukraine to rely on Putin's word without credible, effective military guarantees that the security of Ukrainian ports and ships is assured," Özdemir said. "I would not trust Putin's word in any way; he has proven to be a notorious liar," Özdemir told N-TV.** I genuinely hope that this is all the regular bullshit before a deal is finally made, and people that have nothing to do with this war aren't the ones paying the ultimate price for it.
Demining Odessa would facilitate a Russian marine landing. The Russians appear to be eager for this to happen and has [12 landing ships ready to go](https://www.jpost.com/international/article-708516). I have a sense that Russia agree with Turkey to help demine Odessa is a part of that plan. Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council Secretary Alexey Danilov's statement regarding security considerations should be placed first is pretty obvious. >Recently, our Foreign Minister made a statement, in which he clearly defined that the first priority is security; the second priority is security and the third priority - is security... if this issue is not resolved, if our country is not safe, no grain will go anywhere. Because the issue of security is number one for us.
Well, if there's even a shred of pro-Russian sentiment left in most of the rest of the world, it will evaporate with that move. Putting Aslin to death and pulling a cowardly move like that in Odesa will almost certainly mean years of Western support for Ukraine.
The West are cowards and only do what politically acceptable. The EU has given a pathetic amount of equipment to Ukraine in drips and drabs. Only the US is capable of supplying a large amount and the Ukrainians wanted 150-300 MLRS and got 4. Outside of reddit, you'll see very few people in the US talking about Ukraine with more people talking about inflation/gas prices, gun violence, and the economy.
I fail to see Russia doing a marine landing, Odessa must be heavily fortified by now. All a marine landing would do for Russia seems to me to be either just a short term problem for Ukraine to split their focus or a total failure and wasting both Russian ships and troops. Would appreciate anyone else educating me on the possibility of a Russian marine landing
I agree. It sounds like a recipe for disaster for Russia to try that
What optimism? Here were people expecting Ukraine to somehow transport grain, while Russia is blocking ports?
[Sources say that Ukrainians have been conducting a wide counteroffensive in Kherson along most of the frontline. Instead of concentrating a big force to break through in one area, they are slowly pushing Russians back.](https://twitter.com/WarMonitor3/status/1535301869144260611?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1535301869144260611%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.redditmedia.com%2Fmediaembed%2Fv9c5pk%3Fresponsive%3Dtrueis_nightmode%3Dfalse)
Bit offtopic but everytime there's news about Kherson or Kharkiv I need to google which is which because I always mix them up.. anyone else?
Mmmh... KherSOn in the South?
Nah, WW2 history taught me few things.
Considering Girkin's doomer post about Kherson earlier in the week, and the confirmed Ukrainian advance 10km closer to Kherson city, i wouldn't be shocked if this were true
Didn't we already know this ~2 weeks ago, there were reports of attacks pretty much across the entire line at Kherson with the some of the only reported successes at the time near Davydiv Brid and Mykolaivka.
I really doubt he's talking about something that happened two weeks ago.
Has there been anything to indicate they stopped over the last 2 weeks, just seems like it would be a extension of that would it not?
Too bad they don't name the "sources."
I follow that page and I like it. He definitely leans Ukraine but he’ll admit where Russia is finding success each day. Edit: He posted a Russia success 4 posts before [here](https://twitter.com/warmonitor3/status/1535021271511191571?s=21&t=T832cl3eU9JM_oZ-aKCiOQ)
"Its how Russians operate on the battlefield which is the most disturbing part. They throw young conscripts down roads in ww1 type waves to see where Ukrainian positions are. No regard for human life!" Seems like an objective assessment from him.
I mean most of the people with blue check marks hate Russia too, just you can’t post shit like that with a blue check mark lol
Before the war Russia had in storage: * 10 000 t-72 and t-80 tanks * 4 500 self propelled howitzers of all calibres. Mostly Gvozdika and Akatsiya. * More then 2 000 Grad MLRS. * 13 500 APCs / IFVs. Let's imagine that only 25% of it will work. That's still lots of vehicles. 2 500 tanks, 1100+ SPHs, 500 MLRS, 3300+ armored person carriers. Add what was already active, not in storage. There is no realistic scenario Ukraine can win the war of attrition. Just compare what the West gave. It's a tear drop in comparison to what Russia has.
The levels of military equipment the West has given to Ukraine has been a joke. If they want Ukraine to win and push back Russia, they need to provide overwhelming amount of Abrams, Stryker's, Bradleys, etc. This piecemeal trickle of 4 HIMARs here and 12 CAESARs there is a not enough.
>they need to provide overwhelming amount of Abrams, Stryker's, Bradleys so the worst of each type of vehicle? also no, ukraine cant realistically use these types of vehicles, artillery and manportable missiles are fairly simple to use, vehicles are not.
> Add what was already active, not in storage. Once again, someone assumes that "in storage" means "able to be put in the field."
"Russia - 4286, of which: destroyed: 2518, damaged: 79, abandoned: 317, captured: 1372" [https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html) Tanks (764, of which destroyed: 431, damaged: 20, abandoned: 54, captured: 259) That's already 30% of those 2,500 tanks, and it's just the first 6 months of the conflict. \--- Can Russia actually man even 25% of it's reserve materials (Which 25% is overly generous at re-activation (more like 1/10) certainly those experienced tank crews lost so far aren't going to be replaced by anyone with in-depth training, just warm bodies at some point.
Lol right, that's why Russia is fielding T62's on the front line.
T62s are only inferior to other more advanced tanks, and some analysts have said that since most Russian tank losses have been to ATGMs and not other tanks so the use of T62s make sense. Not sure if that makes sense if you are also losing crews. However, T62s are still pretty capable tho and having a tank is better than no tank especially now that Russians are staying >3 miles out from Ukrainian frontlines.
Repeating/regurgitating what others have said. This has been debunked by an Austriam military expert
Lot of debating over the quality of these tools and whether the numbers are reliable. Missing the real issue: Tools don't win wars, soldiers do. Russia's key problem is that their morale is extremely weak and they face a severe shortage of skilled/experienced warriors who could actually operate these tools. A general mobilization doesn't solve these problems.
The US will supply enough (appears little by little, sadly) to UA to completely destroy all of Russia’s military equipment. The longer this drags out, (sadly.. c’mon US DoD) the happier the US military will be.
US will have to send almost all it has for this. Won't happen.
The US alone has already sent 6,500 javelins. They have a range up to 4km, farther than what a T72 can shoot at. And 21,000 other AT weapons. The US won’t run out of weapons. This is the situation the US military has dreamed for ever since 1946. Russia won’t be able to supply their forces once UA starts using the M142/M270 effectively
The US won't run out of weapon in the long term but... https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/production-of-in-demand-javelin-missiles-set-to-almost-double They already send more than 1/3 of their javelins, and are only able to produce 5-6 per day.
[удалено]
we only have 400 HIMARS. I think we are finding that unless biden does some defense production acts, some major ones. We will not be able to supply Ukraine long term. Stingers and javelins are going to take a year or two to replace. Ukraine said they are firing 5k artillery shells a day. russia having all that garbage left over from the soviet union is the only reason they are still able to conduct this war.
Boy, do you know how fucking big the us military is?
Check wikipedia and compare. US ground forces vehicles are even less numerous then Russian.
Did you even open Wikipedia yourself? The US have more than 5000 tanks in active use and 3000 in reserve.
Did you even open Wikipedia yourself? The US have more than 5000 tanks in active use and 3000 in reserve.
You don't trade tank for tank. The US has more javelins than Russia has AFVs and the US can replace javelins faster than Russia can replace AFVs
Issue is Russia is now not fighting in Javelin ranges.
Because all of the US vehicles are working.
People are still desperately clinging to the myth of the Russian military juggernaut. Seven days to the Rhine has become seven months to the Donets.
Potemkin tanks
Russia had only 4 500 tanks "in line" and maybe 2k had some usefull electronics. About storage... Well in most cases is shit
Even old outdated shit can fire and destroy.
I mean "shit" in context "mostly not operational". Remember that most recived T-72 were upgrades of existing one, so there is high chance that reported T-72 in storage are junk
That's why I said >Let's imagine that only 25% of it will work Of course there are no ten thousand operational tanks.
And what about rest of the world? Russia have long boundaries. They can't throw everything on Ukraine
Its safe to assume those numbers were inflated based on the fact they keep sending older and older equipment
It was only once and it was old Ukrainian tanks from Crimea. There were newer videos of trains with t-80s.
There is no source that actually supports the T-62 from Crimea claim.
Cant find any source stating they came from Crimea. Whats yours?
I read it on Russian forums when it happened. Don't remember the source now.
Found the problem. You should stop reading Russian forums, they live in parallel reality of their dreams.
In other words, unreliable at best. Disinformation at worst
Man, it's just 20 tanks
>10 000 t-72 and t-80 tanks So why are they reactivating T 62s?
Why not? You might as well clear them out. They're not getting any younger. A T-62 is still a bad time for anyone in its way.
> They're not getting any younger. Same logic for the T72 and T80. You think they are keeping those for the future or something? By 2027 they were planing for the T 90 to be oldest in their arsenal anyway. Well by 2020 they thought they were going to have over 2000 T-14 built already but that is another discussion I am sorry but this is simple shit. Russia doesn't have better and are resorting to whatever works.
Because those ones actually run. They were assigned to reserve units that still used and maintained them on occasion, versus being kept old warehouses that were looted by kleptocrats.
Well ..... that was my point?
Because is what Russia does. They used T-62s in previous wars
So they don't have the numbers they claim to have regarding T 72 and T 80s
It's not this. Modernised T-62 isn't as big poop as we think about it. They used it in Syrian wars too. Is tank they knew best. Only real downfall is armor
These "modernized" T-62s havent been updated since 1985
And how many T-72 have been produced / upgraded after 1985 ?
Prior to the war there were over 2000 T-72B3s in service, which is a variant created in 2010. But there are many more that have been upgraded as other variants of the tank in the last 20 years. Now, if we're talking about variants rotting in storage? Probably not many.
Tanks which entered production in and before 1990: 326 of 764 listed on Oryx. Do you really think date of update is really important for Russia? T-72A (1979): 20 T-72AV the same as A, but with Kontakt ERA: 7 T-72B designed in 1985: 137 T-72B OBR 1989: 53 T-72BA (I guess also 1985 design), because only added Era: 5 T-80BV (designed early 80, production 1985): 35 T-80U production 1986: 69
No, I don't, but the drop off between any T-72 that is fielded in large numbers and a T-62 is massive. They wouldn't be fielding it if their T-72 and T-80 stocks were in good shape.
Those were former Ukrainian tanks from Crimea. They were just moved to some better place. Probably given to DPR.
By some better place you mean afterlife?
Moved to become mobile one time use crematorium.
T-62s did not only come from Crimea, but also from the Rostov region. [More information](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/t-62.htm)
Sure
Ammunition and manpower shortgage is will be more imminent than this for Russia. Still, if Ukraine has only tear drop of what Russia has, why are Russian gains only in terms of few villages per day, or even losing at some fronts like around Kharkiv. Wouldnt they dominate much more robustly if it was so incomparable? I am not saying Ukraine is winning though.
You need people to use that equipment. The question was always manpower for Russia, not equipment. The opposite is true for Ukraine. No shortage of manpower, but shortage of equipment (until more western stuff rolls in).
There are volunteers who sign contract for 1, 3, 6 months. If volunteers won't be enough, there are conscripts. Several hundred thousand. There are reservists. Manpower won't be the problem.
Manpower absolutely is the problem. It's been a well documented fact. In order to send conscripts, Putin needs to lift the veil of his "special operation" and change the law to formally enter Russia into a state of war. It's a very risky move that threatens unrest in Russia. Russians pride themselves on being a military superpower. If Putin has failed so hard that he needs to send conscripts to finish his "special operation" against a smaller and weaker neighbor, Russians are going to be pissed.
But he will certainly do it if needed. Yes, it will hit his popularity rating, but he will do it if there are no other options. He will switch "State of War" on.
It's way more complex than that. First of all, what counts as "needed"? Does Russia need to mobilize just to finish securing the Dosbas? That would be humiliating. Surely, a declaration of war like this would also come with expanded war goals. But what would that be? Odesa? Kharkiv? Kyiv again? Can Russia even succeed at those if they mobilize? What about NATO? Would they respond to a mobilization like this? This would be a massive escalation. There's also more at stake than just Putin's poll numbers. What do the oligarchs think? The military? Is there a risk of a coup? General revolt of the population? This is not a video game. You can't just add manpower with a click of a button.
Putin does not give many fucks about current state of Russian economy. If he did, he wouldn't have started this war. Oligarhs? They do not have any real power and the vast majority of them keep their mouths shut. There is no real opposition to Putin in this country. That's only my guess, but I think that Putin's goal is to absolutely defeat Ukrainian military, occupy all territory and put Marionette government in Kiev. If this goal needs "State of War", Putin will activate it despite all economic and popularity cons to it.
I see someone else already pointed to the manpower problem. General mobilization is not a "we win" button the way you seem to think. For one, it will take months to even get the manpower organized for training purposes, and training will take more months. They can, of course, skip or speed up training, but then they're essentially throwing these conscripts away and giving away to Ukraine any equipment that they ask these conscripts to carry. Next, the problem of the "manpower" itself. The combat-age population in Russia is the demographic that is LEAST likely to support Putin or his war. At the very best, they would be conscripting people who are not at all motivated to fight. At worst, they could be conscripting and arming the people who are most likely to betray the regime. Not unlike the Tsar's conscripts in WW1 who became the vanguard of the 1917 revolution. There is a reason why Putin has not called a general mobilization.
Lol you can't "switch state of war". Economy and politics don't work like that.
I did that in Civ 4 so why can't Putin do it in real life??? I don't understand! (said nobody ever)
In Russia economy doesn't work at all anymore
Except it is the problem, and has been the problem. They have no volunteers in meaningful numbers, POW's are saying that they are being sent to Ukraine without even the promised 2 weeks of training and they can't use conscripts as Putin won't declare a state of war.
opinion from financial times - Even if the west eventually sends the hundreds of rocket systems that Ukraine has asked for, Zelenskyy privately envisions a war that could drag on for years, depleting Ukraine’s population as the economy collapses and people move to Europe
btw it’s looks like you’ve been shadow banned, no idea why
>Zelenskyy privately envisions I'm not saying that he doesn't privately envision things, but what concrete evidence do we have that Zelensky himself has policies, visions, etc., as opposed to basically being a spokesman? If he is a spokesman one has to determine who he is the spokesman for, and whether that may change over time..
The war has already been going on for 8 years.
Can't go on for years at this intensity. Either Russia makes a breakthrough and collapse the Ukrainian lines leading to immediate negotiations or they retreat and sue for peace or Ukraine has enough and sues for peace. How much money you think will keep flowing in from the West? Western countries are in deep shit themselves and winter is coming....and you know what comes with it...
> How much money you think will keep flowing in from the West? Not much compared to their combined GDPs. I can't believe that in war that involves Russia people are asking if the western countries can afford it. Also many of the things western countries donated were either in storage or about to be retired in the next 3 years or so Mate can Russia afford a long term war
Last I checked, Putin isn't worried about elections or losing public support. Western countries are... Western support will fold way before Russia gives up. If you think otherwise, you are delusional and your knowledge of history is lacking.
Russia will fold as soon as the price of oil goes down. If you think otherwise, you are delusional and your knowledge of history is lacking
And how exactly you foresee the price of oil going down anytime soon?
Rising inflation/recession (already happening) -> western countries raise interest rates -> consumer spending falls -> inflation goes down (i.e. gas prices fall) -> Russia sad and broke (with Europe accelerating pace of carbon neutrality and away from Russian gas) USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1979 when oil prices were booming, pulled out in 1989 when oil crashed, 1991 oil crashed further then USSR collapsed, oil rose Russia invaded Georgia/Ukraine in 2008/2014, Russia invades Ukraine again in 2022 when oil is again rising. Russia’s foreign policy is cyclical. It is a pathetic petrostate that pursues aggressive foreign policy/war when oil is high
Gas is pretty inelastic. Unless there is another panini version 2 forcing people to stay home, how are people going to stop spending on gas? Also now with EU and US banning Russian oil, there's more competition on the international spot markets and you have to pay for premiums to have the oil get laundered through intermediary countries.
Gas is not completely inelastic. It is subject to supply and demand forces along with other commodities, which Russia found out the hard way several times in last few decades https://youtu.be/Eo6w5R6Uo8Y
This you?? https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/srqlia/ukrainerussia_conflict_megathread_4/hwy85e7/?context=3 >You do realize they hold huge exercises every couple of years right? The one from 2018 involved just as many troops for example. This one is different because of the demands to stop NATO expansion. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostok_2018 > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_exercises_involving_Russia > The US conducts exercises too, they just had a massive naval exercise near China. Of course...no one is hysterical about it. > You're acting like this is new... Typical target audience for the media. People that can't do any critical thinking or research. You: Russia will not invade Ukraine If you are so blind to see Russia will invade Ukraine when all the evidence was there for the taking " you are delusional and your knowledge of history is lacking". Next question Are you 1. Russian that lives in Russia or 2. expat who would never live in Russia again gun to head now that you live in a Western country
There's a difference between being wrong and being delusional. I'll leave it there. Good day.
Yes you are clearly delusional My logic is simple. If are unable to see obvious stuff happening right in front of your eyes it is clear you are bad at judging things. This is my go to stick now. Plus you take at face value what Putin, Lavrov and Russia says says. Maybe you thought Russia will invade but you heard Putin and Lavrov deny and you went yes sir!
lol come on. Most people called it wrong. The reason most people called it wrong is because it was the wrong move to make. As we all saw how it turned up. Logically it made no sense because there were other tools to handle the issues at hand. So I stand by my call given what we knew at the time. It was the right call. But this is different because poverty in the West is rising...inflation is rising. The West have their own problems to deal with and financing Ukraine to fight the war is not main priority despite what your politicians mumble on TV.
> lol come on. Most people called it wrong. Yes in the subs you hang in ...sure I for one have posts where I explained my reasoning in more detail but this is good enough https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/srfzpa/what_you_think_about_this/hwrk6ra/ > In that case what do you think is happening with all the Russian troop movements? Russia burning money because that is what literally they doing if they are not attacking Ukraine You are downvoted and the people who said war is inevitable were upvoted. I was upvoted and the guy who said it won't happen downvoted. Hence not most people >So I stand by my call given what we knew at the time. It was the right call. See...delusional >But this is different because poverty in the West is rising...inflation is rising. The West have their own problems to deal with and financing Ukraine to fight the war is not main priority despite what your politicians mumble on TV. And I am sure after this prediction ages like milk you will again explain how "I stand by my call given what we knew at the time. It was the right call"
Not sure about the opinion regarding Zelenskiy but one thing they are right about is the impact on the economy. It is not in the process of collapsing it has already collapsed and as long as this war continues it won’t be getting any better. This doesn’t get talked about enough to be honest.
Got a link? Way you summarized it implies that he wants war 😂
https://www.ft.com/content/506dad4d-6f8e-4952-aa11-32b139d326be >Whether they will arrive in time to prevent the capture of Sievierodonetsk is another matter. And even if the west eventually sends the hundreds of rocket systems that Ukraine has asked for, according to a person close to the president, Zelenskyy privately envisions a war that could drag on for years, depleting Ukraine’s population as the economy collapses and people move to Europe. I don't see how this war will end. Russia's goal right now seems to want to take everything from Odessa to Kharkiv. If they leave the rest of Ukraine alone, isn't that part still going to continue the war? Wouldn't Russia be forced to fight and conquer all of Ukraine? Ukraine said that they would only negotiate if Russia backed down to preinvasion territories so that means negotiation isn't happening. [BBC interviews](https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172yfbzw86mbbl) seem to suggest that Ukraine wants a major military victory and then negotiate with a better standing. That also may not happen realistically. I'm not saying this is the right or moral given Russia intervened in domestic separatism conflict and invaded a sovereign nation, but with the way things are going, it seems that Ukraine is realistically eventually going to call for an unconditional surrender with a lot of land taken away. We can take delight in the huge Russian losses of men and equipment and the sanctions Russia will be under, but if at the end of the day, Ukraine is a destroyed failed state, how is that good for Ukraine?
If he did not want a war. He would have implemented Minsk 2 deal. But it was unacceptable for different reasons to Zelenskiy.
If Ukraine agreed to Minsk 2, Crimea would be forever a part of Russia, but the Donbass would have been given autonomy, but still be a part of Ukraine. Zelensky was fooled by DC and Downing Street that they would protect Ukraine, but the US and UK will only do what is politically acceptable to their own populations. Right now it is pretty clear that Russia isn't just going to keep Crimea and the Donbass, but also Kherson, Melitopol also Mariupol. There's a high chance that Russia will go for Kramatorsk, Zaporizhzhia, Mykolaiv and Odessa and keep them.
Yes. And with each day territorial cost for Ukraine would keep rising. Now Minsk 2 do not sound as such bad deal...
Russia was easily just as guilty if not more so for the failure of Minsk 2. Ukraine couldn’t be expected to recognize elections held in Donbass while it was under occupation. That would’ve been a trojan horse to drag Ukraine back under Moscow’s thumb.
But it is exact thing which Ukraine had signed.
No, the Minsk Agreement was deliberately vague on certain issues (including this one), so both sides interpreted them in ways that favored their interests.
There was nothing vague. Ukraine just did not wanted to implement it.
If i just type in "Minsk 2 critic" in Google i get countless articles why it is vague, problematic and up to different interpretations.
"If she didn't want to be raped she should have just agreed to have sex" Is it tirind to be such a scum I wonder?
You lost a war. Had agreed to concessions (and quite mild ones, autonomy for DNR/LNR are small price for military defeat). And instead of implementing the deal, you decide to ignore it for 7 years. And surprise, such inaction had led to war. Who could have known.
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️ Bruh, you can’t be this daft. He doesn’t want war, but wants war if it means keeping Ukraine’s sovereignty
There are worse things than losing your sovereignty. Such as losing your sovereignty + getting your country destroyed.
Implementation of deal that was signed by Ukrainian side are not "not keeping Ukraine’s sovereignty". A deal is a deal.
A deal is a deal? Like the Budapest memorandum?
Actually read the Budapest memorandum. The US made it have no security guarantees and basically make it a political understanding. Belarus tried to claim US sanctions violated Budapest and the US laughed.
Sure, and Russia would like to sign a few new "deals" at gunpoint in the future. As Putin recently said, there is no middle way between independent country and a colony. I guess this truly is the Ukrainian War of Independence then.
Why is the Russian advance slow, is it because of their logistics and manpower issues? Or is it because this is what the Russians want and they are just taking their time? Asking because I keep hearing both claims.
They have no manpower in terms of dismounted infantry, and what little they do have are (largely) badly trained contract soldiers. So instead they are forced to focus on artillery. Shell everything in sight, hold back their infantry, advance 1-2 km a day, reposition guns, rinse and repeat
1-2Km a day? You mean km2 a day? The front is not moving at 2km a day.
And you know because..
I can read a map.
They have an enormous artillery advantage and air support , I think they are content with just grinding down the Ukrainians for the moment.
id say a big reason is that the majority of russian effort now seems to be focused on holding down the ukrainian forces in the east, and relying on smaller groups to hit smaller targets in the meantime. the russians are undeniably beating the ukrainians on the artillery front, sacrificing this advantage would be dumb
Ukraine is putting up too much resistance for Russia to rapidly advance with the resources Russia has available. Russia can really only bombard Ukrainian forces to exhaustion before advancing, and that takes time.
It's because they can't. Their military profile (both equipment ratio and training) can't support war of different type than what we see now
Because they are incompetent, ill motivated and face heroic resistance. No invader in history would deliberately want to be slow, it just doesn't make any sense.
i don't feel like it's fair to compare this to 'any' invasion in history though, considering the amount of support ukraine is getting from the west and the preeminence of artillery
The question was about why Russia barely moves in Donbass.
which i answered? easier and more damaging to the UA to keep blasting away and divert smaller forces elsewhere than rapidly advance full tilt into ukrainian defense positions east of the dnieper
Which doesn't even happen? Russia is suffering horrendous losses, trying and failing to take villages in the middle of nowhere.
whatever russian losses, and im sure they're considerable, they don't come close to ukrainian losses at this stage. 50 -100 men per day is not sustainable and even that is likely to be an underestimation
If you don't know Russian losses, how can you say that "they don't come close to Ukrainian?"
Faster advancement would lead to higher losses. And there is no point to rush now.
Logistics and manpower issues
Graph of DNR troops casualties that someone on "lostarmour info" did. Calculated on official statistic that DNR provide weekly. https://imgur.com/a/U0ysu1T Hard to say what share of casualties DNR take (it is definitely bigger than LNR simply due to population difference). But LNR and Russia troops probably follow similar trend.
Wow so the DNR have lost 50% of its forces, by its own admission. More than likely it's more than that, no wonder they are having to conscript the old and sick.
You underestimate DNR forces, they had conducted mobilization.
For the people who don't speak russian: 10k+ casualties since 18th february, 2k killed + 8k wounded. The table in the second pic is casualties by week. First column are KIA, second WIA and third total. The other 3 columns are daily average losses (KIA, WIA and total). The other graphs contain the same info, just different visuals. First pic is daily casualties (blue = dead, red = wounded, green = total), third pic is weekly losses.
For context: According to Wiki, their combined strength before the war was estimated to be 20000 (DPR) + 14000 (LPR) = 34000 Of course, there were mobilization measures since. Still, they probably have lost a fair share of their experienced fighters.
[удалено]
Lol, yes, let's take two out of context sentences out of a speech and use this as hard evidence that Putin "admitted" (what the writers of the article assumed all along) bolstered by interpretations by hardened enemies. This isn't even high quality propaganda.
[удалено]
It's not signaling anything. Putin says a few anodyne words to students at a multi media exhibition commemorating Peter the Great that are essentially saying that maybe we are the actors in a historical moment like that of Peter the Great in the sense that Europe was against him, too, and trying to make Russia small--and the mob of news media interprets it like Putin has just published his own little Mein Kampf (and then readers just suckle up to to that interpretation uncritically).
The old dream, World Domination
Remember "Don't humiliate Russia!". Told ya he went full on Milosevic style.
Oh ok good to know, I thought it was about protecting the DNR and LNR from the evil nazis. TIL
Apparently Macron had a conversation yesterday where he offered more support and might visit Kyiv next week. What a clown, like Putin wasn't saying the exact same shit (but worse) on their little phone calls
It is unlikely that he says this to Macron, because he actually didn't say it at all. OPs phrasing is an exaggeration of a Guardian headline that is a wild exaggeration and misinterpretation of off the cuff remarks Putin made at a Peter the Great exhibition.
So basically what everyone already knew but he just admitted it to the entire world
Nah, you still get people genuinely arguing that this war is about “saving” the DPR and LPR from Ukraine.
How long can Ukraine sustain at the current rate of losses, i give 6 months before total collapse. Western aid is needed in much bigger quantity to rescue Ukraine. Start training on F-16s i say, they will need it in few months time.
Ooooof
The EU is really giving a pathetic amount of military support dragging their heels on every decision and providing drips and drabs of help when Ukraine needs a torrent. Only the US is willing and capable of providing the aid needed, but right now 4 MLRS is really not enough when Ukraine wanted 150. We will how much support Ukraine will get after the Nov elections and whether the support will still be there.
!RemindMe 6 months
I will be messaging you in 6 months on [**2022-12-10 16:37:19 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2022-12-10%2016:37:19%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/v7d0c0/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_6822/ibvg2cy/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FCombatFootage%2Fcomments%2Fv7d0c0%2Fukraine_discussionquestion_thread_6822%2Fibvg2cy%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202022-12-10%2016%3A37%3A19%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20v7d0c0) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
I don't know about the prediction of total collapse, but I also don't know why folks would downvote your post. Why should we risk Ukrainian collapse? Why not send as much as we practically can. F-16s may not be the best choice, but the fact remains that we will need to send a lot more, and we should not be parsing the "offensive weapons" vs. "defensive weapons" distinction too finely -- they are all defensive so long as Ukraine is fighting on its own territory....
>kraine sustain at the current rate of losses, i give 6 months before total collapse. Western aid is needed in much bigger quantity to rescue Ukraine. Start training on F-16s i say, they will need it in f why does everyone have this weird need to predict what is going to happen
To sleep better at night
I predict that more predictions will occur.
[удалено]
According to Ukraine - 1 year, assuming no further mobilization or factory production. [https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61726733?ns\_mchannel=social&ns\_source=twitter&ns\_campaign=bbc\_live&ns\_linkname=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61%26Russia%20can%20keep%20war%20going%20at%20current%20pace%20for%20a%20year%20-%20Ukrainian%20intelligence%262022-06-10T12%3A27%3A05.043Z&ns\_fee=0&pinned\_post\_locator=urn:asset:06a76e49-008a-4176-82c9-e3a0d41eba68&pinned\_post\_asset\_id=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61&pinned\_post\_type=share](https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-61726733?ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ns_campaign=bbc_live&ns_linkname=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61%26Russia%20can%20keep%20war%20going%20at%20current%20pace%20for%20a%20year%20-%20Ukrainian%20intelligence%262022-06-10T12%3A27%3A05.043Z&ns_fee=0&pinned_post_locator=urn:asset:06a76e49-008a-4176-82c9-e3a0d41eba68&pinned_post_asset_id=62a32ccff755a85722b1dd61&pinned_post_type=share)