re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict

From the Russian Two Majors channel:

quote:

---

Insanity in the Kherson direction is aggravated (open appeal).

Unfortunately, the situation described in this material (LINK is developing in the worst traditions of our MO. The commission, which left to "deal with" sees its only task to find and punish those who "took the garbage out of the hut", and ... who stood up for the soldiers from the arbitrariness of the authorities.

I want to convey to the high offices of the Moscow Region (and not only). The problem is definitely not solved. Soldiers (IN ALL THE DIRECTION!!!) know about it not from the reports of the Ministry of Defense, but from the "soldier's radio reports". There is a uniform "star" going on there.

The mass of soldiers seethes and is indignant. And today's "demonstrative punishment of the innocent" and the excuse of the guilty will only lead to the next stage of the escalation of the problem and its transfer to the civil society of the Russian Federation (and, unfortunately, this is already happening).

It’s the 21st century in the yard and hiding it ... well, it won’t work (is it really still incomprehensible)?

Well, as a result, we will continue to put our soldiers here absolutely senselessly and with almost zero results (as it was in exactly the same situation more than a month ago in the Antonovsky Bridge area). And there will be many other indirect negative results that will affect the course of the JEE.

Therefore, I conjure God - sort it out normally in the situation, and not ... as it happens today.

OR THERE WILL BE A TROUBLE!!!!

---

quote:

---

When I first started following the thread properly in early June last year it was always interesting to see your view on situation, which back then was fairly pessimistic towards Ukraine's chances and attracted numerous down votes due to this, yet you remained unapologetic in what you had to say.

It has been refreshing to see your continued reassessment of the situation as it develops from a non-partisan perspective

---

Thanks. Like I said, I try to be as objective about the war as possible without allowing personal or political considerations cloud my assessment.

I do still see the odds still being against Ukraine in the long run. I’m not saying they cannot force Russia into a settled peace on terms favorable to Ukraine, just that it will be difficult. A couple days ago I discussed the major questions and vulnerabilities of both sides.

For the Ukrainians, it’s the question of Western military aid. Without it, Ukraine would be forced to sue for peace in weeks. But as long as Western military aid continues, Ukraine has a shot.

For Russia, it comes down to public support. How long will the Russian people support a foreign war where there is a daily stream of casualties for seemingly little to no gain and no end in sight? In my opinion, one of the main things this Ukrainian offensive can achieve is to further erode Russian support of the war by (1) bleeding the Russian army and (2) pushing the Russian army back. Anything Ukraine can do in this offensive that can be painted as a positive for Ukraine will only further erode support for the war in Russia.

Think you mean that they are rumoured to have breached the fortifications marked by the red line below?

The blue circle from your third image is on the secondary main line marked in orange that extends between Pshenychne up to Verbove.



A breach here is not good for Russia as the distance from the red line fortifications to the third defensive line centred around Ocheretuvate is only about 7km.

This puts the T0401 northern route which runs through it in jeopardy and places the defensive lines between Verbove and Polony under considerable logistical pressure to keep them supplied.

Edit: For reference as I didn't mark it on the map, Orcheretuvate is just south of the fortifications you see at the bottom of the above image - these are the third defensive lines and look to be the most elaborate.

quote:

---

I only disagree with the public opinion thing on Russia. They don’t think like we do. You’re interpreting their potential actions through the glass of western democracy.

---

I’m actually basing my opinion on Russian history. Russia has fought numerous wars since the early 1900s:

Russo-Japanese War (lost)
WWI (lost)
Soviet-Polish War (lost)
Soviet-Ukrainian War (won)
WWII (won)
Soviet-Afghanistan War (lost)

As you can see, their win/loss record isn’t that good in the modern era. Why is this? Well, you have to look at the context of these wars to gain an understanding that will help you understand the context of the current war.

First, let’s set aside the Soviet-Ukrainian War in the early 1920s. I say that because of a few factors. For starters, Ukraine was a fledgling country, having only gained independence following the recent collapse of the Russian Empire, with no armed forces to speak of. Plus Ukraine had already been invaded by also recently reborn Poland. And on top of all that, there was a sizable Communist movement in Ukraine at that time that helped the Red Army overrun Ukraine.

So that leaves all the other wars. What was the nature of those wars? Why did Russia win WWII despite the fact it cost them 20 million people in the process, but lost all the other wars with far lesser losses? The answer to all this is simple. In WWII, Russia was defending itself. Germany invaded Russia. And not only did Germany invade Russia, they did so in a manner that Genghis Khan himself would have been horrified at. It was obvious to the Russians they were fighting for national and racial survival in WWII.

So what about the other wars? Well, those wars were not for survival of the country. The Russo-Japanese war was on the other side of the planet to most Russians. In WWI, Russia mobilized and invaded Germany (disastrously) to defend Serbian Slavs. In the Russo-Polish War, the aim was to spread Communism to Europe. And in Afghanistan, the Russians were again trying to spread Communism to a foreign country. So none of these wars was about the survival of “Mother Russia”. Another thing all these wars have in common is they all became stalemates where Russia was losing men daily for seemingly nothing. As these wars dragged on, public support waned and eventually collapsed.

So what lessons can we take from all this? Simply put, if you invade Russia and threaten their national existence, they will fight on no matter what. Hitler (and Napoleon a century before) learned this lesson the hard way. But, if Russia goes into a war that’s not for national survival and that war devolves into a stalemate, then the clock is ticking. History proves its only a matter of time as to when public suport for the war will be gone.

The Soviet afghan war was 10 years long. It was obvious it was pointless long before that.

WW1 is a poor example because there was a guy named Lenin making shite difficult for the Tsar.

Japan just whooped their arse in that exchange which proves my point.

quote:

---

WW1 is a poor example because there was a guy named Lenin making shite difficult for the Tsar.

---

Almost like getting wrecked on the front by ludendorff and hindeburg, by a force that even Germany thought couldn't defeat the Russians before the war, set the stage for regime change.

What point are you trying to make exactly?

The point that waiting on the “Russian people” to do anything is misguided.

The “Russian people” will turn on the war after Russia experiences military defeat and not before. It will happen as a result of Ukrainian victory, not as a precursor. There’s no value in discussing the impact of Russian public opinion in the war.

quote:

---

WW1 is a poor example because there was a guy named Lenin making shite difficult for the Tsar.

---

This only happened with returning soldiers.

quote:

---

quote:
Yeah, there's absolutely zero chance that Ukraine is going to sit on the Abrams and not use them. I believe that the 200 Ukrainians training on them in Germany have completed their training and are now simply refining their skills there as they wait for the delivery. In the grand scheme of things, 31 Abrams might not be a lot, but in this sector of the front during this offensive, they could be decisive.



IMHO they would be better off using them elsewhere in a defensive position, keeping them fueled and serviced on a moving front may be a bit too much sugar for a dime.

---

Where ever they go, they will need lots of anti-air for drones and helos along with strong counter battery fire.

quote:

---

WW1 is a poor example because there was a guy named Lenin making shite difficult for the Tsar.

---

I’ve seen a lot of inaccurate gross oversimplifications of historic events, this has to be one of the worst. Lenin didn’t “make shite difficult” for the Czar. The gargantuan losses, economic upheaval, and seemingly pointlessness of the war to the Russian people was what made shite difficult for the Czar. In fact, when the Czar abdicated in March 1917, it was to hand over power to the Provisional Government headed by Prince Georgy Lvov who was later replaced by Alexander Kerensky. In this new provisional government, the Bolshevik only held a small number seats and no real power. Most Russians didn’t even know who Lenin was at that point. In fact, when the Czar abdicated, Lenin was still in exile in Switzerland. Lenin didn’t return to Russia until after the Czar had abdicated. Lenin wasn’t a cause if the Czar’s fall from power, instead his return was a result of the Czar’s fall from power.