Live Conflict Ukraine-Russia War

blackjack

Contributor
Russia Correspondent
Messages
1,106
Reactions
3 571
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Russia
Sometimes I wonder if this conflict would have ended faster if Russia decided to fight IDF style.

1. Andriy Yermak is desperately trying to convince US officials to continue weapons assistance

2. Oleksandr Dubinsky has been placed under house arrest, it seems he and a group are accused of leading the charge to overthrow Zelensky. The issue is, he is being charged with corruption, as part of the Quid Pro Quo the democrats alleged on Trump, that Dubinsky was the guy providing Intel on the financial dealings between Biden and his family and the Yermak/Zelensky administration. The plot thickens, as they are begging trump now to open the spigot of military and financial assistance , which is held ransom by the Republicans in the House of Representatives

3. Zaluzhny is already tapped to replace Zelensky, but this faction supported by certain forces in the US (Biden) is now trying to discredit Zaluzhny, by leaking articles to the New York Times - which state that Zaluzhny was in effect responsible for the nord stream pipeline bombings. It's clear that within the US, Europe, and Ukraine, 2 factions have split, with Yermak, Zelensky, Biden, as the main actors in one team, and Zaluzhny, Arestovich, perhaps US Republicans on the other. Either way, if Zelensky is toppled it's likely that Ukraine wants to negotiate a surrender, and join NATO as a consolation for the territorial losses. The problem is, the Russian war economy is not being factored by the western analysts, and so they just discuss the topic as if Russia was not influential at all to the situation- and it is just seen from Ukraines eyes, either total victory, or the NATO membership.

What is funny, is Russia has no intention to negotiate with either party. Russia is going to collapse Ukraine and all support for it, exactly as its doing. As Avdeevka falls, the events in Kiev will accelerate, and if he is removed, Zaluzhny will likely have to double down on Zelenskys original strategy, as Russia is in no mood to negotiate anything with Ukraine. However, Zaluzhny could be better suited to lead Ukraine from a military POV. Meaning Ukraines defenses could improve simply because a general would be leading the war. But my belief, and the belief of Russian military experts, is that Zaluzhny has no chance to mount a defense, after Donbass is captured. He can't do what Surovikin did, and dig trenches with mines, because the crucial factor lacking, is the aviation. And that will prevent them from establishing any kind of meaningful defense to stop the Russian army.

1699982181856.png

To better illustrate what I mean, you will see that the M-19 highway, is basically what the Ukrainian army, used to build its defensive positions. Essentially they followed the road from Kharkov to Donetsk, taking advantage of the dozens of factories, mini cities, plants, and infrastructure to build a massive fortified complex. But take a look behind, there is nothing behind it, there is one major highway, which leads to Poltava, but which runs east-west, and then no big chain of cities or infrastructure , until the E-105 which runs from Kharkov to Zaporozhye/Melitopol. That will be the next target for the Russian army, essentially after the Donbass, a series of big arrow maneuvers, which favor the army, as the terrain is flat, and there are no large urban agglomerations to build a large defense
 
Last edited:

Relic

Contributor
Canada Correspondent
Messages
1,167
Reactions
9 2,024
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
Sometimes I wonder if this conflict would have ended faster if Russia decided to fight IDF style.
They tried and they got their teeth kicked in. The VKS proved woefully incapable of operating with the Army in a combined arms setting. Essentially, their bombers and fast jets have been reduced to long range standoff platforms. When they try to involve their CAS (SU-25 or KA-52) they start losing them (and more importantly, their pilots) in numbers they can't afford to lose.

IDF has air superiority over Gaza, the VKS has nowhere close to that. They rarely want to fly their aircraft anywhere close to Ukraine's air space.
 

blackjack

Contributor
Russia Correspondent
Messages
1,106
Reactions
3 571
Nation of residence
United States of America
Nation of origin
Russia
They tried and they got their teeth kicked in. The VKS proved woefully incapable of operating with the Army in a combined arms setting. Essentially, their bombers and fast jets have been reduced to long range standoff platforms. When they try to involve their CAS (SU-25 or KA-52) they start losing them (and more importantly, their pilots) in numbers they can't afford to lose.

IDF has air superiority over Gaza, the VKS has nowhere close to that. They rarely want to fly their aircraft anywhere close to Ukraine's air space.
Ukraines air defenses have constantly failed with interceptions of any kind, And they could have the option of targeting hospitals or large infrastructures with plenty of people inside but chose not to.

I am also 110% sure that since the start of the war to 18-20% of ukraine controlled by Russia has more civilians than the number of civilians in Gaza. So lets not try to be in denial that they could have went IDF style at the start of the war
 
Last edited:

Relic

Contributor
Canada Correspondent
Messages
1,167
Reactions
9 2,024
Nation of residence
Canada
Nation of origin
Canada
New defense package from Germany 🇩🇪 delivered to Ukraine. The Germans continue to send consistent shipments to Ukraine.

- 10 Leopard 1A5 MBTs
- 14 Bandvagn 206 vehicles
- 5 Warthog tracked ambulances
- 1 Wisent mine clearing tank
- 10 Vector UAVs
- 14 GO ground surveillance radars
- 3 border protection vehicles
- 4 8x8 HX81 truck tractor trains
- 4 semi-trailers
- 16 Zetros trucks
- 13 Man TGS trucks
- 3 unknown vehicles
- 1020 rounds of 155mm shells
- 1.4 million rounds of small arms ammo
- 10,000 safety glasses

 

Spitfire9

Committed member
Messages
256
Reactions
6 342
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
losing land to Russia means likely losing it forever.
Agreed. I do not think that Ukraine's backers (some of whom said they would back Ukraine for as long as ii takes) should stop backing Ukraine. If they do stop:

- some Ukrainians who lived under democracy until Russia invaded will be forced to live under totalitarianism
- it will be a demonstration that more powerful countries will be able to profit territorially from invading less powerful countries

Those effects are undesirable.
 

Ecderha

Experienced member
Messages
4,380
Reactions
4 7,591
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
You should think about how ridiculous that statement is.
Why you saying that!? I am just try to understand, are you naive?

he is paid ruzzian troll.
ruzzian propaganda factories pay to workers/trolls to fabricate lies, they create troll content.
They must post specific amount of posts each day in different social platforms in order to get salary.
They are monitored to do this and meet the day quote.
It is NOT allowed to think or do right things or talk about logic.... etc.

You wasting you time. You will not succeed by writing such statements. It is mission impossible.
You only helping him by give him chance to create more troll posts
 

Spitfire9

Committed member
Messages
256
Reactions
6 342
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
Why you saying that!? I am just try to understand, are you naive?

he is paid ruzzian troll.
ruzzian propaganda factories pay to workers/trolls to fabricate lies, they create troll content.
They must post specific amount of posts each day in different social platforms in order to get salary.
They are monitored to do this and meet the day quote.
It is NOT allowed to think or do right things or talk about logic.... etc.

You wasting you time. You will not succeed by writing such statements. It is mission impossible.
You only helping him by give him chance to create more troll posts
Sorry. My mistake - I did not look at the poster's description of himself/herself.
 

Ecderha

Experienced member
Messages
4,380
Reactions
4 7,591
Nation of residence
Bulgaria
Nation of origin
Turkey
ruzzians beating ruzzians:
These ruzzian soldiers are blamed for the annihilation of a "1st company."
Video recorded for the survivors of the 1st company, with an offer to pick up these "cowards" and to do with them as they please.

on ruzzian side moral is low, even there are worst places where no food given. Just new meat came and they immediately send them to die. Who ever survive start to starvation period.
No food!
Most of them are using drugs, how they get it at moment is unknown.
Many ruzzian meat soldiers are despaired
 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,317
Reactions
20 11,927
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
Agreed. I do not think that Ukraine's backers (some of whom said they would back Ukraine for as long as ii takes) should stop backing Ukraine. If they do stop:

- some Ukrainians who lived under democracy until Russia invaded will be forced to live under totalitarianism
- it will be a demonstration that more powerful countries will be able to profit territorially from invading less powerful countries

Those effects are undesirable.
Well if I'm Russia, best to stop offensive action for at least 2 years, that will save manpower and equipment,while prolonging stalemate.

After 2-3 years, of pause in large offensive operation, the Russian army must duplicate what the Iraqi Army did in the Faw Campaign 1988. That is to broke the Ukrainian back and prove that lend lease don't work/a waste of effort.

The other option is to launch localized attack not to conquer land/population centers, rather to expand the defensive line further so that there's more line to cross for Ukrainian soldier when they start another counter offensive (which will likely end in failure).
 

MaciekRS

Well-known member
Moderator
Poland Moderator
Messages
335
Reactions
3 933
Nation of residence
Poland
Nation of origin
Poland
Russia dont have limitless time. Their economy is taking a hit, their oligarchs are rapidly loosing money, few years of that and they will became vassal country to China.
I am sure that MANY people in russia and for example Germany or France want to end this war ASAP and they want to trade again.
 

Spitfire9

Committed member
Messages
256
Reactions
6 342
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom
Well if I'm Russia, best to stop offensive action for at least 2 years, that will save manpower and equipment,while prolonging stalemate.

After 2-3 years, of pause in large offensive operation, the Russian army must duplicate what the Iraqi Army did in the Faw Campaign 1988. That is to broke the Ukrainian back and prove that lend lease don't work/a waste of effort.

The other option is to launch localized attack not to conquer land/population centers, rather to expand the defensive line further so that there's more line to cross for Ukrainian soldier when they start another counter offensive (which will likely end in failure).
They say that wars are won through logistics.

Russia may be able to degrade a lot of infrastructure in Ukraine but its efforts do not seem to target infrastructure of military importance. I surmise that Russia has been amassing drones in the last few months, to be unleashed soon in mass attacks to saturate Ukrainian air defences. I guess these attacks will be mostly against infrastructure in towns and cities but while this will make life much harder for civilians (loss of housing, electricity supply etc), I don't think this will dramatically undermine Ukraine militarily. In contrast Ukraine seems to use its resources more intelligently, aiming to damage infrastructure useful to the enemy militarily (roads, bridges etc).

No longer does either side make any decisive gains by offensive ground action. The taking of Bakhmut, Robotyne etc were of no real consequence. Should Russia pause such offensives with the intention of resuming in much greater strength years later, the slow build up of technologically superior weaponry by Ukraine - western fighters with anti radar missiles, stand off attack munitions, fighters with superior radar to Russian types, more long range precision strike artillery and rocketry et al - will put Russia in a vulnerable position.

Assuming that the US maintains its support for Ukraine, I envisage Ukraine severely undermining Russia's ability to supply its forces in the occupied corridor of land west of the Donbas, forcing Russian withdrawal when faced with Ukrainian combined operations offensives including air support. If Russia decided to fight rather than withdraw I think it would be defeated, forcing retreat.

Short term I see a stalemate. Longer term I see Ukraine cutting the supply corridor between the Donbas and Crimea. If that goes, Crimea may become untenable.
 
Last edited:

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,317
Reactions
20 11,927
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
No longer does either side make any decisive gains by offensive ground action. The taking of Bakhmut, Robotyne etc were of no real consequence. Should Russia pause such offensives with the intention of resuming in much greater strength years later, the slow build up of technologically superior weaponry by Ukraine - western fighters with anti radar missiles, stand off attack munitions, fighters with superior radar to Russian types, more long range precision strike artillery and rocketry et al - will put Russia in a vulnerable position.

The ball currently is on Ukraine's side, Volodymyr Zelensky has declared that the retaking of ALL Ukrainian territory from 1991 is the stated goal. That means all of Donbas and Crimea MUST be brought back under the suzerainty of Kyiv. That's a big bowl to fill, the longer the war drags the slimmer the chance of victory for Ukraine. Remember, Russia's size is 3.5 times that of Ukraine.

The war is only in the 20th month, but Meloni of Italy has admitted fatigue among the allies, meanwhile, the average age of Ukraine's combatants is now up 10 years to 45 years of age. Even if they manage all the weapons, Ukraine admits that they don't have enough men to man one.

The West will keep providing arms, but due to the minuscule Western arms industry, Ukraine for most of the time will still rely on Soviet-era weapons.


We have not yet heard about Rheinmetall or KMW of Germany mass-producing Leopards for Ukraine, but there's a lot of footage about the Russian tank industry pumping out tanks and IFVs


Also, It's naive to think that only Ukraine "upgraded" its weapons, true, Ukraine is now able to have their hands on GMLRS, ATACMS, and so on, but Russia is increasingly high tech as well, we now see Russians deploying smart bombs in regular cycles. Wait a few years we'll likely see the VKS proficient enough to penetrate Kyiv's air defense bubble.

.


when faced with Ukrainian combined operations offensives including air support.

I have talked about this before, the Russian aviation industry supplied more aircraft than it lost, even with F-16, you cannot go head to head with the Russian air force, not with the small number of F-16 and not without the supporting force multipliers (AWACS, tankers and so on).

Without air superiority, let alone air supremacy, Ukraine is more or less operating the same they operate today.
 
Last edited:

Spitfire9

Committed member
Messages
256
Reactions
6 342
Nation of residence
United Kingdom
Nation of origin
United Kingdom

When F-16 turns up I suspect that its presence alone may limit use of Russian aircraft by way of caution. It may be that it will not need to engage Russian fighters and ground attack aircraft to limit their sphere of action. More important to me will be its ability to strike at Russian radars, fuel dumps, command centres, ammo dumps from a safe distance.

I don't see the Ukraine army pushing the Russians back on the ground to any great degree unless Ukraine can degrade Russian logistics to the point that its forces on the front line are deprived of the materiel needed to put up an effective fight.

I think that the arrival of Storm Shadow and Scalp prompted Russia to change where it stationed naval assets. The arrival of F-16 may also change where Russia deploys its air assets. I guess that F-16's will also be stationed well away from the front to lower the chances of being hit on the ground.
 

Soldier30

Contributor
Messages
972
Reactions
5 577
Nation of residence
Russia
Nation of origin
Russia
Now in combat operations in Ukraine, drones are used not only to attack military equipment and infantry, but are also used to attack other drones. The video shows a Russian drone hitting a Ukrainian army drone. After the impact, the Ukrainian drone fell and exploded. Models of drones and the location where the air battle took place are not reported.

 

Gary

Experienced member
Messages
7,317
Reactions
20 11,927
Nation of residence
Indonesia
Nation of origin
Indonesia
When F-16 turns up I suspect that its presence alone may limit use of Russian aircraft by way of caution. It may be that it will not need to engage Russian fighters and ground attack aircraft to limit their sphere of action. More important to me will be its ability to strike at Russian radars, fuel dumps, command centres, ammo dumps from a safe distance.

I don't see the Ukraine army pushing the Russians back on the ground to any great degree unless Ukraine can degrade Russian logistics to the point that its forces on the front line are deprived of the materiel needed to put up an effective fight.

I think that the arrival of Storm Shadow and Scalp prompted Russia to change where it stationed naval assets. The arrival of F-16 may also change where Russia deploys its air assets. I guess that F-16's will also be stationed well away from the front to lower the chances of being hit on the ground.

The F-16 no doubt is a great addition and a formidable plane in itself, but the mere presence of F-16 = Russian air force self-limiting their operation? Not a chance.

The Russian air force's fighter greatest enemy is Ukraine's AD and their own. If the F-16 wants to challenge the Russian Su/MiG in the skies they'll have to contend not only with the Su/MiGs but the entire Russian air force ecosystem with AWACS, GCI radar, EW, etc which tilted heavily with the Russian.

And please note the F-16 supplied will be the F-16MLU with APG-66v2 radar, this is still very capable, but not very capable to the point where Russia will scale back its operations.
 
Top Bottom