Started By
Message

re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Posted on 5/10/23 at 3:26 pm to
Posted by GOP_Tiger
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2005
20970 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 3:26 pm to
quote:

I'm just trying to not get too optimistic about what's to come. I think they should absolutely try and take back Crimea, I just am not as optimistic as some seem to be in thinking it will be another route like Kharkiv or Izyum and Lyman. Crimea is THE thing Russia really wants.



And I'm not saying that it would work. Attempting a major crossing of the Dnipro is a very risky move that could end in disaster. But I think that they are going to try it.
Posted by LSUPilot07
Member since Feb 2022
8599 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 3:52 pm to
It’s going to be interesting to see how well Ukraine can pull off combined arms maneuvers without air cover. That’s the big issue as our combined arms is predicated on having air superiority but this is a unique war in that neither side really owns the sky because both sides have anti air defense rings that are very effective. I can’t help but think about what just one squadron of F-35s could do for Ukraine. This will never happen of course but it would be very damaging to Russia if they did.
This post was edited on 5/10/23 at 3:55 pm
Posted by Coeur du Tigre
It was just outside of Barstow...
Member since Nov 2008
4332 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 4:17 pm to
quote:

With the counteroffensive likely coming soon, does anyone want to irresponsibly speculate with some wild predictions?

As most of us that are a bit obsessed with this war, I have spent way too much time looking at maps and reading military opinions. But that road only leads to confusion so instead of predicting where, I’ll chicken out with a few observations.

Number one: the use of drones in this offensive will make all pre-offensive thought antiquated. We are not prepared to see the effect of these weapons but it will be profound.

Number Two: the Ukrainians have been and will continue to be unpredictable to a degree that confounds Western defense experts, let alone the Russians.

Number Three: I don’t believe that anyone knows where the main Ukrainian attack will take place, not even the Ukrainians. Here we have it -

quote:

These are essentially diversionary/fixing attacks. But don't forget that the Kharkiv offensive started out as a diversionary attack and ended up being the greatest success Ukraine has had in this war. If one of these attains a breakthrough, reserve forces could still be poured through to exploit it.


I’ve been thinking the same thing. I believe the Ukrainians have made a list of 10-12 places where the Russians are weakest AND the logistical network on the Ukrainian side is optimal. They will hit a number of these places and see what falls out. If they get traction, they keep going – IF they can logistically support the offensive. But first and foremost, logistics will be the final arbiter of whether an attack is diversionary or a major, sustained push and that decision will only be made when the attack initially becomes successful.

There are a number of places with very weak Russian defenses but poor logistics. Crossing the Dnieper is a good example of this. Even though a city like Kherson is able to hide large numbers of troops, vehicles and supplies, logistical support over that river would require almost total air defense on a sustained basis. I’ve been wrong before but I don’t think that can happen.

On the other hand, the logistics networks into a number of places in the Luhansk and Donetsk areas are very well established. However, once they would break into these areas, they would run into a difficult road network. Especially in the Donbas. But it can be done and I believe at one or two places in the East the Ukrainians will have another Kharkiv-type success. But if so, it will depend on logistics, not weaponry.

That leaves everyone’s favorite, Zaporizhzhia. Again, logistics will make the decision and in this regard places like Tokmak and Polhony attract the eye. These places have the roads and expected or not, you can’t play bait and switch with the supply chain. Entrenched fuel lines will help, but if we want to take a wild assed guess as to where it happens, don’t look at the Russians, look at the roads.

Finally, an assumption. I believe the Ukrainians have the weapons to destroy the three Crimean bridges. The US DoD insists it won’t be ATACMS and the Storm Shadows seem to still be in the UK, but if the Ukrainians are to take Crimea, these bridges have to go. Especially the Kerch Bridge. So I don’t think the Ukrainians will invade Crimea but will cut it off and wait until the Russians escape. And then we will see a real parade.


.
Posted by LSUPilot07
Member since Feb 2022
8599 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 5:29 pm to
Ukraine is going to be ok logistically. They have slowly accumulated a good number of heavy fuel tankers as well as fuel trailers to keep the tanks and vehicles running. They have plenty of bridging equipment and mine clearing vehicles also. That’s before you take into account all the support vehicles, Humvees, MRAPS, etc..
Posted by ticklechain
Forgotten coast
Member since Mar 2018
834 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 5:37 pm to
don’t look at the Russians, look at the roads.


I would imagine that a few hundred very heavy armored vehicles and whatnot rolling down any road would pretty quickly reduce it to hammered dogshit? Would this be a safe assumption?

Esp tracked vehicles
This post was edited on 5/10/23 at 5:39 pm
Posted by CitizenK
BR
Member since Aug 2019
15688 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 5:53 pm to
quote:

I would imagine that a few hundred very heavy armored vehicles and whatnot rolling down any road would pretty quickly reduce it to hammered dogshit? Would this be a safe assumption?

Esp tracked vehicles


I think that road base under pavement is the important part. A few potholes not that big an issue. Offroad ground more important for the combat vehicles, whether tracked or wheeled
Posted by BRHSBulldog
Member since Aug 2015
33 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 5:56 pm to
My only source: LINK

It is a good read, and wow, a 76 year old guy in a recon unit!
Posted by MoarKilometers
Member since Apr 2015
21123 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 6:12 pm to
Had a local kid buried, after fighting for Ukraine. Apparently his grandparents were immigrants and he felt compelled to join up the cause for his former homeland.
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
65770 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 6:18 pm to
What a waste of a life.
Posted by LSUPilot07
Member since Feb 2022
8599 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 6:56 pm to
You call a kid dying in combat for something he felt strongly about a wasted life? I’d say he was right where he felt he needed to be and knew the dangers but did it anyway. Not a waste of a life at all.
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
65770 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 6:57 pm to
quote:

You call a kid dying in combat for something he felt strongly about a wasted life?


Just because you feel strongly about something doesn't mean it's worth dying for, or that your life/death provided value.
This post was edited on 5/10/23 at 6:57 pm
Posted by SteelerBravesDawg
Member since Sep 2020
43337 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 6:58 pm to
Telling me that you never served in the military w/o actually telling me that you served in the military.
Posted by facher08
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2011
6082 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:00 pm to
quote:

What a waste of a life.


wHy dON't YoU gO OVeR tHErE aND FiGht??
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
65770 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:00 pm to
quote:

Telling me that you never served in the military w/o actually telling me that you served in the military.


If he was serving in the military, we wouldn't know he died in Ukraine.
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
65770 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:02 pm to
quote:

wHy dON't YoU gO OVeR tHErE aND FiGht??


Doing your best Zelensky impression?
Posted by Lakeboy7
New Orleans
Member since Jul 2011
28324 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:06 pm to
Another “humanitarian” tard. They can’t openly support Putin so they become humanist.

They don’t give two shits about this kid.
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
65770 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:07 pm to
quote:

Another “humanitarian” tard. They can’t openly support Putin so they become humanist.

They don’t give two shits about this kid.


You kidding? I don't see a point to any American being involved in this conflict for either side. It's not our problem and we should have nothing to do with it.

This kid was free to go over there and do whatever he wanted. It was just stupid of him.
This post was edited on 5/10/23 at 7:08 pm
Posted by Proximo
Member since Aug 2011
24122 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:08 pm to
Brainwashed kid. He wasn’t old enough yet to truly understand the government’s manipulation of him
Posted by cypher
Member since Sep 2014
5647 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:10 pm to
not sure about this, don't know if its plausible but thought it worth posting

The British can transfer to Ukraine not Storm Shadow, but Turkish ballistic missiles KHAN, - Defense Express expert Kirichevsky
10 may, 2023 wednesday 16:44

The UK may not transfer to Ukraine Storm Shadow missiles, capable of striking targets at a distance of up to 300 km, because their adaptation to new aircraft will take a long time
This was said on the air of Espresso by Defense Express expert Ivan Kirichevsky.

"I think the British will not give us Storm Shadow missiles. If we analyze the known experience of using this missile in real battles, this is not what we need to inflict a significant defeat on the Russians. Storm Shadow has shown itself well in expeditionary missions in the fight against ISIS or the Assad regime, but it is a subsonic missile that is shot down at the level of Russian X-101s," he said.

According to Kirichevsky, it is unlikely that the British themselves, relying on efficiency, will give them to us.

"Most likely, the British can mention Turkey. If you rely on the wording that the missile is similar in characteristics to ATACMS - then it will be a Turkish ballistic missile KHAN with a range of up to 300 km, there is even a more powerful shoulder than ATACMS. And launchers for these missiles are already us - this is official information from the 49th artillery brigade that we have Turkish rocket systems," the expert said.

He added that apparently, the British can give us these missiles, and Storm Shadow, perhaps, somehow for later.

"The adaptation of such a rocket to a new aircraft is very long, the Eurofighter Typhoon had to be converted for them for 6 years. And we need these missiles for yesterday. And KHAN ballistic missiles are what can be given with the option for yesterday," Kirichevsky summed up.

Evpreso TV

Twitter thread

Posted by Lakeboy7
New Orleans
Member since Jul 2011
28324 posts
Posted on 5/10/23 at 7:11 pm to
In your opinion, which adds up to dry shite.
first pageprev pagePage 2713 of 5046Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram