Thoughts on the Russo-Ukranian War?

[MontyB]

If she has the NZ nationality, she can't be deported to Ukraine .Besides, the things she is accused for,did happen in NZ.

Antonina Ovchinnikova is not a "traditional Kiwi name, I am prepared to get she is an import.

If it is indeed true, can she be deported?

It would depend on her immigration status but she could be if she was a resident and not a citizen

Doesn't say her Nationality. Guess NZ didn't impose sanctions if the article is correct about her not violating NZ law. Russian propagandist.

We have imposed sanctions along the same lines as other western nations, my guess is that the money she is raising is from Eastern Europe and not New Zealand via Telegram as it is a platform only really used by conspiracy theorists and anti-government types here..
To be honest if she was raising cash for non-lethal aid I wouldn't care but it isn't.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/30...sian-army-could-hinge-on-bank-details--expert

Personally, I don't think she is going to be happy here now that her name and region are known as even though we have our Putin apologists the country is overwhelmingly pro-Ukrainian.

On a positive note, Cambodia is offering demining assistance to Ukraine, it is an area they have a huge amount of experience in.

https://www.ucanews.com/news/cambodia-offers-demining-assistance-to-ukraine/99275

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

Quite interesting. NZ is imposing sanctions against Russia so she is violating the sanctions. Is she a NZ citizen or a permanent resident? The Canadians can revoke citizenships if the person has committed a serious offense, is this in this category? Probably not. To clarify, Canada can revoke citizenships if a person has immigrated to Canada from another country and later apply for citizenship and became a citizen.

Can she be extradited even if she is a citizen? Yes, she can if NZ and Ukraine has reached an agreement about it prior this event, but it also depends on the crime. Usually crimes that can be within the legal framework of extraditions are severe violent, drugs (organized criminality) , and/or sexual crimes.

If she is just a resident, I assume the NZ will kick her out

 

[MontyB]

Quite interesting. NZ is imposing sanctions against Russia so she is violating the sanctions. Is she a NZ citizen or a permanent resident? The Canadians can revoke citizenships if the person has committed a serious offense, is this in this category? Probably not. To clarify, Canada can revoke citizenships if a person has immigrated to Canada from another country and later apply for citizenship and became a citizen.

Can she be extradited even if she is a citizen? Yes, she can if NZ and Ukraine has reached an agreement about it prior this event, but it also depends on the crime. Usually crimes that can be within the legal framework of extraditions are severe violent, drugs (organized criminality) , and/or sexual crimes.

If she is just a resident, I assume the NZ will kick her out

My guess is that she is married to a NZer.

Hard to say with our government, they are very much into the touchy feely nonsense.
At worst she could get a $100000 fine or up to 5 years in prison but knowing our judicial system it is more likely to be her court costs paid and an apology for taking up her time.
Personally I think she should be put on a plane and told to bugger off and if she is married to a Kiwi he can go too.

I would suspect our laws are similar to Canada as Commonwealth countries tend to be fairly similar.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

To use their air force would have been counterproductive for the Russians .
To use it now would not help them as their air force can not stop the Ukrainians from moving their forces ,and if it could do it ,it still would not help the Russians : they need boots on the ground,and they don't have them .
To defeat the Ukrainian army ( not to stop the Ukrainian advance ),to conquer Ukraine and to occupy and pacify Ukraine,they need 1 million men . They only have 200000 men . And the intervention of a few hundred aircraft will not change this .These aircraft will not conquer and occupy/pacify Ukraine .
You see it much too narrow :the defeat of the Ukrainian army does not result in the end of the war .

I disagree with it. In the beginning of the war the Russian used its air force to take out air bases, air defenses, command & control. The Russian didn't finish the job and suddenly the Russian air force disappeared. To have air superiority makes it much harder for the enemy to regroup his forces and to supply his forces. The achilles heel of all armed forces is their logistics. The air force and we can include everything with air to surface capabilities can make it very difficult to move about without being attacked. The Russian air force had the capability to get the air superiority, but apparently they went on a vacation somewhere. The Ukrainian air force does exist and it is providing with close air support during the two main counter attacks.

You bring up another interesting question and more or less at the same time the Russian air force went on a vacation, it apparently brought the Russian infantry with them. The Russian military has showed a very bad performance with the coordination between infantry and mechanized/tank units. The Russian tactical battlegroups' contain very little infantry and mech/tank units have nothing to do in urban areas without using infantry to clear buildings and only use tanks as support if and when the face resistance.

Another important about thing about the war is or symmetric wars in general is; you don't need to outfight the enemy, if the enemy is losing its ability to supply or regroup his forces, the air component of the war effort will contribute to force the enemy to either give up when he cannot move his forces. An army unit last for about four days when the supply lines are cut or severely delayed. That varies depending on what kind of units we are talking about. Motorized/mechanized infantry units consume a lot of fuel, the artillery units require a lot of fuel and ammunition. To hit his supply lines will really hurt him.

The supply lines are the major concern for the Ukrainian counter attack. If the outstretching their own supply lines, the attack will end and it will provide the Russians with the time to regroup and restructure their own supply lines. The Ukrainians have been successful so far to reduce the Russian ability to conduct military operations to stop the Ukrainian offensive.

There are fewer symmetric wars, but we can take a closer look at the symmetric wars being fought since the end of the Second World War and what role the air forces play in those wars.

 

[lljadw]

One can not discuss the present situation in Ukraine, if one has not the proofs for the Russian aims in March 2022 .
These aims were not the conquest, occupation and pacification of Ukraine by the Russian army, because this was totally impossible and the first two aims ( conquest and occupation ) would risk to start a guerilla war as in Afghanistan :the OUN continued to fight against the Soviets til 1949, without any western help .
The original aim ( I doubt that the Russians have today an aim ) was to defeat the Ukrainian forces on the border(for which there was no need for a mass intervention of the air force ) ,hoping that this would result in the fall of the Ukrainian regime ( the comparison with Barbarossa and Afghanistan 1 and 2 is striking ) and its replacement by someone as Lukachenko . When this failed, it was over and the Russians were faced by a mission impossible : after 5 months they had conquered 20 % of the Ukrainian territory, thus a total failure .Meanwhile,the Ukrainians have reconquered 5 % of their territory, also not a big success .
Would the intervention of the Russian air force today ''help '' the Russians ? It could make it more difficult for the Ukrainians to launch an attack, but this would not change fundamentally the military situation ,which is a stalemate . The Russian air force can fire thousands of missiles,but these will not force Zelensky to capitulate and,unless suddenly the Russians collaps, Zelensky will not be able to expel them from Ukraine .
Even if this intervention would ''help '' the Russians,they never can conquer,occupy and pacify Ukraine :the Ukrainian borders with the western countries ( Poland, Hungary, Romania ) is more than 3500 km long .These borders will be used to supply the Ukrainian resistance and must thus be guarded by the Russians ,this alone would tie more than 200000 men ,and tens of thousands other Russians will be tied in Kiev and Charkov .
Other point is the Western ( de facto US ) help ,the importance of which which is very exaggerated by the military-industrial complex and its media .
The Russians had only a few weeks to win and failed to win ,but during these few decisive weeks,the Western help was almost insignificant .
About the Russian tanks ( too many of them ) that were used :the Russians committed 2000 tanks ( no body knows how many they lost or how many they still have ) because they were short on infantry and hoped that these tanks could replace the lacking infantry, but the result was the opposite : the more tanks that were committed, the less manpower remained available for infantry duties :tanks needed an enormous logistical service and a big protection from the infantry and artillery :a tank without such protection is a sitting duck .
The Russians failed although they used 2000 tanks and a few aircraft and 200000 men.
They would also have failed if they used 200 tanks and 10 times more aircraft and 600000 men . .The outcome depended and still depends on the willingness of the Ukrainians to capitulate or to fight .
The Ukrainians can endure the war longer than the Russians.Sooner or later the Russians will have to leave ( as in Afghanistan or as the US in Iraq, Vietnam and Afghanistan ).

 

[lljadw]

The intervention of the Russian air force in March did not force Ukraine to give up and the absence of the Russian air force today does not help Ukraine :the Russians are still in Ukraine .5 % of Ukraine has been liberated, 15 % of Ukraine is still in Russian hands .
If there would be now 1000 Russian aircraft active in Ukraine,the Russians would not have occupied an additional part of Ukraine,besides, if they did it , it would not help them .

 

[BritinBritain]

I disagree with it. In the beginning of the war the Russian used its air force to take out air bases, air defenses, command & control. The Russian didn't finish the job and suddenly the Russian air force disappeared. To have air superiority makes it much harder for the enemy to regroup his forces and to supply his forces. The achilles heel of all armed forces is their logistics. The air force and we can include everything with air to surface capabilities can make it very difficult to move about without being attacked. The Russian air force had the capability to get the air superiority, but apparently they went on a vacation somewhere. The Ukrainian air force does exist and it is providing with close air support during the two main counter attacks.

You bring up another interesting question and more or less at the same time the Russian air force went on a vacation, it apparently brought the Russian infantry with them. The Russian military has showed a very bad performance with the coordination between infantry and mechanized/tank units. The Russian tactical battlegroups' contain very little infantry and mech/tank units have nothing to do in urban areas without using infantry to clear buildings and only use tanks as support if and when the face resistance.

Another important about thing about the war is or symmetric wars in general is; you don't need to outfight the enemy, if the enemy is losing its ability to supply or regroup his forces, the air component of the war effort will contribute to force the enemy to either give up when he cannot move his forces. An army unit last for about four days when the supply lines are cut or severely delayed. That varies depending on what kind of units we are talking about. Motorized/mechanized infantry units consume a lot of fuel, the artillery units require a lot of fuel and ammunition. To hit his supply lines will really hurt him.

The supply lines are the major concern for the Ukrainian counter attack. If the outstretching their own supply lines, the attack will end and it will provide the Russians with the time to regroup and restructure their own supply lines. The Ukrainians have been successful so far to reduce the Russian ability to conduct military operations to stop the Ukrainian offensive.

There are fewer symmetric wars, but we can take a closer look at the symmetric wars being fought since the end of the Second World War and what role the air forces play in those wars.

Quite frankly I am surprised how poorly the Russian military are performing, the Ukrainians are showing the world how big a joke the Russians are.

 

[lljadw]

The supply lines are the major concern for the Ukrainian counter attack. If the outstretching their own supply lines, the attack will end and it will provide the Russians with the time to regroup and restructure their own supply lines. The Ukrainians have been successful so far to reduce the Russian ability to conduct military operations to stop the Ukrainian offensive.

To stop Ukrainian counter attacks will not help the Russians .
Neither will do regrouping and restructuring their supply lines, because time is running against Russia : time is a very strong ally of Ukraine .
A defensive strategy that you propose will only delay the Russian defeat .Their only chance of success is a big offensive resulting in a big Ukrainian defeat that forces Zelensky to give up,giving the Russians the opportunity to return to Russia while Ukraine will be ruled by a pro Russian dictator .
The Russians are now in the position of the Germans after Stalingrad at the East front or of the Germans at the end of 1915,with the difference that the Russian position is worse than that of the Germans .With the 200000 available men, Russia can not ''win ''.
The Russians can not afford a war of attrition ,while , for the moment,the Ukrainians are unable to expel the Russians from their country .
Both have failed, but the Russian failure is more serious than the Ukrainian failure .

 

[MontyB]

To stop Ukrainian counter attacks will not help the Russians .
Neither will do regrouping and restructuring their supply lines, because time is running against Russia : time is a very strong ally of Ukraine .
A defensive strategy that you propose will only delay the Russian defeat .Their only chance of success is a big offensive resulting in a big Ukrainian defeat that forces Zelensky to give up,giving the Russians the opportunity to return to Russia while Ukraine will be ruled by a pro Russian dictator .
The Russians are now in the position of the Germans after Stalingrad at the East front or of the Germans at the end of 1915,with the difference that the Russian position is worse than that of the Germans .With the 200000 available men, Russia can not ''win ''.
The Russians can not afford a war of attrition ,while , for the moment,the Ukrainians are unable to expel the Russians from their country .
Both have failed, but the Russian failure is more serious than the Ukrainian failure .

Not sure that is accurate as the biggest threat to Ukraine isn't Russia but rather the west losing interest and stopping the flow of equipment, basically Putin is less of a threat than a change of government in the USA is.

 

[lljadw]

Not sure that is accurate as the biggest threat to Ukraine isn't Russia but rather the west losing interest and stopping the flow of equipment, basically Putin is less of a threat than a change of government in the USA is.

Even without the US help for Ukraine, Russia is unable to win.
It is unable to conquer, occupy,pacify Ukraine . The 40 million Ukrainians will always be hostile to Russia .
Before the start of the war,the 200 US military instructors had been withdrawn at the order of Washington and only a few Ukrainian military had received the needed training to use a Javelin and still, the Russians failed .
What most people in the West,who are indoctrinated by the Cold War propaganda, fail to understand,is that Russia is much,much weaker than was the USSR and that the USSR was much weaker than were telling us the media of the military-industrial complex .

 

[MontyB]

Even without the US help for Ukraine, Russia is unable to win.
It is unable to conquer, occupy,pacify Ukraine . The 40 million Ukrainians will always be hostile to Russia .
Before the start of the war,the 200 US military instructors had been withdrawn at the order of Washington and only a few Ukrainian military had received the needed training to use a Javelin and still, the Russians failed .
What most people in the West,who are indoctrinated by the Cold War propaganda, fail to understand,is that Russia is much,much weaker than was the USSR and that the USSR was much weaker than were telling us the media of the military-industrial complex .

Even so without the US supply of weapons Ukraine has problems.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

The Russian response to the Ukrainian offensive is to attack the Ukrainian power grid which doesn't reduce the Ukrainian armed forces to conduct military operations. The major Russian failure now is they are wasting military resources to hit non-military targets. If the Russian armed forces had used these resources to hit the Ukrainian logistical lines, the Ukrainian had been forced to halt their offensive operations.

There are questions about the Russian military training, because their performance is really bad. The question is why, there are several reasons for the bad performance, the Russian command structure, their communications (they are using civilian cell phones, which they did during the wars in Chechnya and Georgia and paid dearly for it) The motivation of the Russian forces. Another reason for the lack of competence is probably corruption. Having exercises cost a lot of money, if the funding for exercises end up somewhere else the military units ability to conduct military operations will be impaired.

 

[MontyB]

This will probably cause some grief but I got sent the link by a friend in Poland and parts of it are funny...

Ivan is gone

I have heard Ukrainian versions of it (this is the only English version I can find) but I suspect it was written by a pro-artillery type.

 

[lljadw]

Even so without the US supply of weapons Ukraine has problems.

Offensive problems ,but,defensively they are stronger than the Russians .

 

[MontyB]

Offensive problems ,but,defensively they are stronger than the Russians .

Name the last side to win a defensive war.

 

[lljadw]

Name the last side to win a defensive war.

What is winning ?
To defeat the enemy army ?
To liberate your territory?
To conquer a part of the territory of the enemy ?
The Ukrainians prevented the Russians to capture more than 20 % of Ukraine ,which means that they were strong defensively and the Russians weak offensively .
But the Ukrainian counter offensive had as result the reconquest of only 5 % of Ukraine,this means that the offensive capacities of Ukraine are still weaker than the defensive capacities of Russia .
The result of the Ukrainian counteroffensive is a stalemate and a war of attrition .
If there is tomorrow an armistice and next week a peace treaty and Russia can still conserve its conquests ( 15 % of Ukraine ) ,would this not mean a Russian victory in their defensive war ?
The Iraqi-Iranian war was at the end a defensive war from Iraq and this war finished by a peace treaty,because Iran was unable to fulfill its offensive aims . Can one not say that Iraq won ?
The Korean war finished with an armistice because both sides were unable to fulfill their offensive aims . Can one not say that both won ?

 

[MontyB]

What is winning ?
To defeat the enemy army ?
To liberate your territory?
To conquer a part of the territory of the enemy ?
The Ukrainians prevented the Russians to capture more than 20 % of Ukraine ,which means that they were strong defensively and the Russians weak offensively .
But the Ukrainian counter offensive had as result the reconquest of only 5 % of Ukraine,this means that the offensive capacities of Ukraine are still weaker than the defensive capacities of Russia .
The result of the Ukrainian counteroffensive is a stalemate and a war of attrition .
If there is tomorrow an armistice and next week a peace treaty and Russia can still conserve its conquests ( 15 % of Ukraine ) ,would this not mean a Russian victory in their defensive war ?
The Iraqi-Iranian war was at the end a defensive war from Iraq and this war finished by a peace treaty,because Iran was unable to fulfill its offensive aims . Can one not say that Iraq won ?
The Korean war finished with an armistice because both sides were unable to fulfill their offensive aims . Can one not say that both won ?

It is an interesting question.
From a "dominant" Ukrainian view:
In terms of a ceasefire I suspect the minimum Ukraine would accept is a return to the borders as they were on 23 Feb 2022, the best case would be the borders on 19 Feb 2014.

However while Putin remains in charge there is no chance of a win for Ukraine short of Ukrainian tanks in Red Square (an impossibility) as he is always going to come back.

My guess is that at some point the battlefield will become untenable for one side at which a negotiated settlement will be reached but if it doesn't involve western peacekeepers in Ukraine then they will be fighting again a couple of years later as Russia cannot be trusted.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

It is an interesting question.
From a "dominant" Ukrainian view:
In terms of a ceasefire I suspect the minimum Ukraine would accept is a return to the borders as they were on 23 Feb 2022, the best case would be the borders on 19 Feb 2014.

However while Putin remains in charge there is no chance of a win for Ukraine short of Ukrainian tanks in Red Square (an impossibility) as he is always going to come back.

My guess is that at some point the battlefield will become untenable for one side at which a negotiated settlement will be reached but if it doesn't involve western peacekeepers in Ukraine then they will be fighting again a couple of years later as Russia cannot be trusted.

A "victory" for Ukraine would be if and when the Russian cannot take this beating any longer. The Ukrainian armed forces have the initiative right now and will not be interested in any negotiations. The Russians might want to drag this into a war of attrition again. The Ukrainians cannot be successful in a slugger fest and they will most likely loose the initiative if they are allowing themselves to do it.

There is a quite interesting development in Kherson right now. Are the Russians retreating or are they trying to set a trap to drag the Ukrainians into a costly battle of Kherson

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

Even without the US help for Ukraine, Russia is unable to win.
It is unable to conquer, occupy,pacify Ukraine . The 40 million Ukrainians will always be hostile to Russia .
Before the start of the war,the 200 US military instructors had been withdrawn at the order of Washington and only a few Ukrainian military had received the needed training to use a Javelin and still, the Russians failed .
What most people in the West,who are indoctrinated by the Cold War propaganda, fail to understand,is that Russia is much,much weaker than was the USSR and that the USSR was much weaker than were telling us the media of the military-industrial complex .

It doesn't work like that. What the US instructors and instructors from other countries do is to train quite few Ukrainians and then they train other Ukrainians. Modern weapon system like the Javelin and NLAW are user friendly, it doesn't take long to train somebody to lock the missile on a target and push the buttons. Both are fire and forget kind of weapons. The main contribution by NATO countries is to restructure the Ukrainian command structure to NATO standard and how to coordinate between the different branches of the armed forces to a common goal.

 

[MontyB]

A "victory" for Ukraine would be if and when the Russian cannot take this beating any longer. The Ukrainian armed forces have the initiative right now and will not be interested in any negotiations. The Russians might want to drag this into a war of attrition again. The Ukrainians cannot be successful in a slugger fest and they will most likely loose the initiative if they are allowing themselves to do it.

Like it or not Ukraine can't win no matter how much we want them too, even if Ukraine pushes them all the way back to the 2014 borders and retakes Crimea all the Russians will do is pull back to Russia, rebuild their strength and come back in the mean time firing missiles into cities.

The only way to guarantee Ukrainian independence and territorial sovereignty is via third party (NATO or US) involvement inside Ukraine.

There is a quite interesting development in Kherson right now. Are the Russians retreating or are they trying to set a trap to drag the Ukrainians into a costly battle of Kherson

It is quite obviously a trap, they wouldn't be withdrawing from their centre while reinforcing the flanks if they were simply pulling out.