Ukraine Analysis Why Russia will lose this war

[RogerRanger]

Interesting I guess preventing Russians gaining control of the areas would be the only way forward. Like pushing them back and retaiing control.

No. All the moves the Ukrainian state has made have caused their defeat. First you don't enforce conscription, you don't hand out weapons to everybody, you don't release prisoners. Basically the Ukrainians have just destroyed the legitimacy of their own government, in a total war 2nd generation attritional warfare doctrine. This will cause 4GW in Ukrainian cities, and it has already started.

As we see the Russians are actually allowing the Ukrainian people to protect against the Russian invasion. This is what you do, you allow people the liberty and the legitimacy of their thoughts and opinions, to object to what you are doing. You don't harm them or berate them. If the Russians were invading, as the western media says, they would be shutting down all protest, as the Ukrainian government has done.

You can't stop the Russians gaining control, if they are bypassing your force and encircling them, the Ukrainians would have to maneuver with the Russian movements, like dancing with a partner. They don't have the capabilities to do that, as you need excellent light infantry to do that. The Ukainians have mountain troops, but that isn't light infantry. So the war is over from my perspective. The Russians have won and the continued fighting is the globalists trooping in the major cities not wanting to surrender. To which 'and I think this is a mistake' the Russians are doing to use targeted and directed artillery and air strikes to kill them basically.

 

[RogerRanger]

Not entirely - Kharkiv & Kiev for example will be facing just that. Kharkiv is already facing it as we speak:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498274194970517505

While the rest of the country may see maneuvers avoiding population centres (like Mariupol for example), Kiev will be the exception as the Ukrainian leadership will be entrenched and the only way to remove them (and by extension, the current regime) would be to go in.

But it's not entirely clear to me why Kharkiv is getting so much strategic focus in that regard - yes its the 2nd biggest city but not the seat of political power.

Because the globalists what the Russians are calling 'NAZI's or ultra nationalists' don't just stay in the capital they move to smaller cities to exert their control. So three cities will be a 'problem' for the Russia. Odessa, Kharkov and Kiev.

We see this in the UK where the major cities Manchers/Birmingham/London exert massive globalist regional control over England. Its sad and disappoint to see the Russians attack cities, its a terrible idea.

 

[Barzani]

Because the globalists what the Russians are calling 'NAZI's or ultra nationalists' don't just stay in the capital they move to smaller cities to exert their control. So three cities will be a 'problem' for the Russia. Odessa, Kharkov and Kiev.

We see this in the UK where the major cities Manchers/Birmingham/London exert massive globalist regional control over England. Its sad and disappoint to see the Russians attack cities, its a terrible idea.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498549404529270784

Every was saying the Russian missile was inaccurate and missed the building. But it seems they geolocated this Azov group that was outside the building with the tents and vehicles. Are the two videos the same place?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498396358473969664

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498580384145047553

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1498535108445409282

This Azov was the one doing the pigs fat on bullets

 

[Nilgiri]

An immediate reaction (literally - this is not a considered, thought-through response) is that apparently the Army has increased its investment in Rashtriya Rifles from 50 (@1,000 per formation, 50,000 troops) to 75, a 50% increase.

As you perhaps know, I am hugely opposed to the entire RR concept, for two reasons, but I shall mention the bigger one.

Counter-insurgency plays hell with the war-fighting ability of the Army. The discipline required, the inter-operation with other units, the use of weapons systems of more than platoon level, the command responsibility for melding a number of differently equipped formations into one, smooth-functioning organisation - none of these are available in COIN.

The discipline is of a lesser degree; COIN, as practised now, consists of following up on the information laid by a network of informers, that is, cornering and neutralising an outgunned, untrained enemy exposed to a few weeks weapons training at Muridke and with no other exposure to weapons.

Inter-operation with other units amounts to, at most, interaction with the local policemen at the site.

Weapons systems are restricted to infantry battle rifles or assault rifles, at worst, a sub-machine gun, perhaps a sniper rifle. And grenades, of course.

Command responsibility, too, reduces to a single officer, maybe two, trying to keep a small team focussed towards the detected infiltrators, to pull together a small squad. The very doorstep of a full-featured command responsibility.

Yep, very well said.

It's not for nothing that my buds that are in the know stateside have told me US army seriously needs a decade or more to "unlearn" all the COIN bad habits it has picked up for the last couple (in AFG and IRQ)....to make it more a regular conventional army (to deal with other conventional forces) like it was prior.

 

[Nilgiri]

Im really curious how China would fare in a real war.

Well they don't give us a whole lot to go upon since the 79 debacle with Vietnam.

PRC has changed a lot since, but it has not done a huge mobilisation to study stress and strain....maybe it really does not want to find out too much about itself and keep that kind of thing as an unknown.

It is in process of changing a lot of its units for use in short-brief wars....but that is different matter to all out sustained wars....and leaves a lot of unknowns within that process its doing too.

This is all part of the reason PRC has opted to expand its navy at much more furious pace....you get rich rewards there in power projection (and power level during a war too) lot quicker as there are not so many intricate moving parts regarding operations and mobilisations like there is with an army.

i.e warships have intense investment baked in per sailor they carry by virtue of what they simply are (compared to the reference point of say especially infantry in an army)

Air forces are somewhat in between the two branches in this overall.....especially constrained by range and presence that warships easily deploy even in peacetime to "workout" on.

 

[Joe Shearer]

PRC has changed a lot since, but it has not done a huge mobilisation to study stress and strain....maybe it really does not want to find out too much about itself and keep that kind of thing as an unknown.

I believe it has, to test its logistic capabilities. The results were reported, but that happened years ago. All I can recall is that a battalion would be available anywhere on PRC's borders in a day, a brigade in three days, and so on; the upper end larger volumes are too fuzzy in my mind.

 

[Joe Shearer]

It is in process of changing a lot of its units for use in short-brief wars....but that is different matter to all out sustained wars....and leaves a lot of unknowns within that process its doing too.

Wherever there is evidence that a military doctrine is changing to favour a short brief war, and wherever there is room for neutralisation of two sets of nuclear assets, there will be a temptation to plan for a long-grinding war of attrition, that is specifically meant to wear down an opponent and force him to endure a long-term hostile attack. I wonder how they would react. Perhaps, like the US after December 7th, they will shrug things off and bring to bear their formidable industrial capacity.

 

[Joe Shearer]

This is all part of the reason PRC has opted to expand its navy at much more furious pace....you get rich rewards there in power projection (and power level during a war too) lot quicker as there are not so many intricate moving parts regarding operations and mobilisations like there is with an army.

i.e warships have intense investment baked in per sailor they carry by virtue of what they simply are (compared to the reference point of say especially infantry in an army)

Air forces are somewhat in between the two branches in this overall.....especially constrained by range and presence that warships easily deploy even in peacetime to "workout" on.

This is also a very high-risk strategy. Warships are peculiarly risky, because the casualty rate in a damaged or sunk warship is enormously high. Can the PLA, psychologically speaking, do anything about this?

 

[Nilgiri]

I believe it has, to test its logistic capabilities. The results were reported, but that happened years ago. All I can recall is that a battalion would be available anywhere on PRC's borders in a day, a brigade in three days, and so on; the upper end larger volumes are too fuzzy in my mind.

Yes this is the short-brief war (mostly punitive oriented) stuff.

Expanding this to the scale and frequency needed (annually like reforger) for sustained wars remains to be seen...and the capacity to learn and implement (without upsetting ppl stuck in certain nodes all along it).

There is a heavy entrenched issue in the PLA CnC ladder in vast amounts of their bulk units that will take a long time to address first before they attempt it IMO....if they are even interested in that. It is all so opaque to a huge degree. I have seen some very good authors in western analysis institutes get some things completely wrong because of it....because they think and assume in certain terms to bridge large unknowns within the PLA.

Wherever there is evidence that a military doctrine is changing to favour a short brief war, and wherever there is room for neutralisation of two sets of nuclear assets, there will be a temptation to plan for a long-grinding war of attrition, that is specifically meant to wear down an opponent and force him to endure a long-term hostile attack. I wonder how they would react. Perhaps, like the US after December 7th, they will shrug things off and bring to bear their formidable industrial capacity.

Yes overall I agree with this. The Chinese have studied everyone quite closely and implemented a lot of what they think will work best for them. Using their strategic depth and industrial capacity as natural fulcrums for their plans depending on the adversary.

It is however quite a large task to do and keep doing in this very different world with new paradigms past what we seen in WW2.

This is also a very high-risk strategy. Warships are peculiarly risky, because the casualty rate in a damaged or sunk warship is enormously high. Can the PLA, psychologically speaking, do anything about this?

Yes...but simply it is what has come out of the churning cogs and overall differential equations (and their laplace and fourier transforms)....in what the PRC has deemed to be the most likeliest possibilities of conflict and what their contours will be.

They rest quite assured that there will be little to no reason to call upon the large army at its full strength to do something.....that it in itself combined with China's size and other factors....will be ample deterrence to anyone.

Hence the decision to bypass that for the last few decades (and likely some more still) and work on the extended tentacles of the concept....where there is more perceived return on investment so to speak.

The risks are of course there, but deemed to be quite worth it.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Yes this is the short-brief war (mostly punitive oriented) stuff.

Expanding this to the scale and frequency needed (annually like reforger) for sustained wars remains to be seen...and the capacity to learn and implement (without upsetting ppl stuck in certain nodes all along it).

There is a heavy entrenched issue in the PLA CnC ladder in vast amounts of their bulk units that will take a long time to address first before they attempt it IMO....if they are even interested in that. It is all so opaque to a huge degree. I have seen some very good authors in western analysis institutes get some things completely wrong because of it....because they think and assume in certain terms to bridge large unknowns within the PLA.



Yes overall I agree with this. The Chinese have studied everyone quite closely and implemented a lot of what they think will work best for them. Using their strategic depth and industrial capacity as natural fulcrums for their plans depending on the adversary.

It is however quite a large task to do and keep doing in this very different world with new paradigms past what we seen in WW2.



Yes...but simply it is what has come out of the churning cogs and overall differential equations (and their laplace and fourier transforms)....in what the PRC has deemed to be the most likeliest possibilities of conflict and what their contours will be.

They rest quite assured that there will be little to no reason to call upon the large army at its full strength to do something.....that it in itself combined with China's size and other factors....will be ample deterrence to anyone.

Hence the decision to bypass that for the last few decades (and likely some more still) and work on the extended tentacles of the concept....where there is more perceived return on investment so to speak.

The risks are of course there, but deemed to be quite worth it.

That tells me what I wanted to know.

 

[You]

....millions of Ukrainians have left ...destruction ...dead ....appears Putin has accomplished part of his objectives ...which is usually the case with wars -no clear winners....the civilians take the brunt of the pain

 

[Madokafc]

Im really curious how China would fare in a real war.

Your question worthy a long explanation thread you know

If anything, i don't want to see China use their military into real war just like what happened in Ukraine today. If that kind of thing happened my country would be screwed too very hard

From my assessment, they are have more complete logistic planning and experience to do long term expedition against their neighbor and circle area of their sphere of influence around first ring Asia Pasific theater. Be it land Forces and Naval projection they already have capability to do that kind of military projection along with prolonged military conflict.

How i can be so sure

First they are taken seriously food issue, and now they are kinda self sustain for any major grain production (rice, wheat, corn, barley, oats and so on) and at the same time can exported some of their grain abroad. This food production level is what had been Made the US can send their armies abroad without worry.

Second, their logistic arrangement and level of planning can be seen from how their civillian market distributed their production and people across the country, this including how their companies can send online market goods for their domestic and external market within timetable manner and discipline. This would reflect on how their military would take logistic issue much more seriously compared to their civillian counterpart. And much better infrastructure among Asia Pasific countries is served such purpose too....

From the assets they had, they have very large merchant marine fleets in which can be utilized as Cargo transport in case of war. Remember during WW II, US merchant marine fleets is very crucial to deliver the much needed logistic and sustain losses during the war. China already have such capability today. Their land assets, no need to say, they have complete industry (automotif, railway and even aircraft) infrastructure and widely dispersed among their many Cities across the mainland.

Third, in conventional Type of arms they have more complete package and solution even compared to the Russian they are more formidable. In C4ISR and electronic warfare domain, i am long suspected their already reach operational capability of the US in 90's decades or maybe even better. And to see their commercial drone like DJI have such commendable feature, i am sure they are already equipped their frontline units with better ISR recce drone more suitable for such mission.

Fighting against them today would be nowhere from the mincemeat tactics during Sino Vietnam war

 

[Sandersoid]

Russia already lost. Just by starting this 'war'. Sorry for my English, it's kinda bad. So. The whole Russian army is here. W-H-O-L-E. Moreover, they are recruiting people from the previously captured "republics" in 2014. In occupied Kherson, people are forced into the front ranks. Ukrainians. Elite detachments were destroyed even near Kyiv. In the first three weeks. Now they have one problem - how to present war to society and not be overthrown. A month after Lend-Lease, there will be nothing left of the Russian army. Europe literally has nothing to be worried about. We'll handle this imperial scourge, but... everybody knows what we need. I am writing this because panic is raging in European society due to not having a complete picture of what is happening. Believe me, if we are calm here, you can be even calmer. Think about it. You worry about the army that stealing toilets. And there is one more problem that we have to face here. There are freezer tanks full of Russian bodies at the train stations. Their mothers don't want to take them. Help us! They didn't smell very good before, but now it's getting hard to bear.

 

[Wize1]

I don't believe Russia is going to lose this war.

 

[Nutuk]

I don't believe Russia is going to lose this war.

She already did, Russian objective was to take Ukraine and replace the government with a Russian puppet government.

Now Russia is trying to save face as good as it gets by taking at least the Donbas region

 

[Jagdflieger]

As long as Putin is alive or replaced by a same mindset and character - there is no way for Russia to lose this war.

If they are able to sustain or enjoy their "victory" or territorial gains - economically and politically would be another issue.

 

[Woland]

As long as Putin is alive or replaced by a same mindset and character - there is no way for Russia to lose this war.

If they are able to sustain or enjoy their "victory" or territorial gains - economically and politically would be another issue.

You can't seperate the economic and political implications from territorial gains. Putin's regime can claim to a domestic audience that they won because the borders of Russia have moved, but there is no scenario at the end of this in which Russia emerges as a more powerful and wealthy nation. Russia has torpedoed any hope it had at a prosperous future because it gravely miscalculated how the war would play out.

 

[MaciekRS]

Russia already lost, how much we will see.
The may gain some ruined Ukrainian territory (and what will they do with it? Its not XVth century) but they lost massive part of its army that cant be replaced without west. They will loose Kazahstan, there is a good chance that they will loose Belarus.
And come on, in XXI century they will be unable to fly soon cause their stolen planes cant even land in China now and spare parts reserves are going down.

Of course fact that Russia lost doesnt mean that Ukraine won, they are loosing people, they are loosing cities, but what can they do? They MUST defend themselves from orcs. If they do, they take away Cherson then there may be bright future ahead of them.

 

[UkroTurk]

Russians did not just lose the war, they either lost all Ukranians who used to be neutral against Russian imperialism and Putin fascism.

Moreover Putin himself created Ukrainian patriotism. After the war every citizen of Ukraine has started feeling strong emotional ties with the homeland.

 

[Gary]

Russian losses are unsustainable, they are literally demilitarized daily for the past 3 months.

Ukraine too are broken, its main industrial heartland in the East is kaput, its people are flocking out into Central and Western Europe. A massive depopulation is underway, and this is from a country with a very low birth rate and only a population of 40million before the war.

Militarily, Russia could still win a phyric victory on some part of Ukraine, but then once they reach that phase. They'll be exhausted politically, militarily and economically. Which will left them very vulnerable at the world stage.

My guess is the west wont let Ukraine in its entirety fall into Russia and be ruled by a puppet Lukashenko like president. But I have this funny feeling that the west are blocking significant chunk of aid that could be decisive (ie. Fighter jet) that could finish this war quick.

A Russia engaged in a prolonged high intensity conflict is likely the west best interest right now. In a year from now we will see if Russia will still be able to supply their army with tanks instead of technicals, and if Russian citizens especially younger ones could kept their calm and composure without western goods.