Thoughts on the Russo-Ukranian War?

MontyB said:
I think it is in the wrong place for that, this only looks capable of cutting the western most tips of the Russian pincers.
I have often wondered whether a single drive south along the Luhansk border wouldn't be effective.
Click to expand...

It can be pretty simple. The Russian supplies couldn't provide the Russian forces in the area and they were forced to retreat.

I googled the Storm Shadow and it has a range about 250km, 155 miles so it can hit the bridge and probably cause some damage
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
It can be pretty simple. The Russian supplies couldn't provide the Russian forces in the area and they were forced to retreat.

I googled the Storm Shadow and it has a range about 250km, 155 miles so it can hit the bridge and probably cause some damage
Click to expand...

Assuming they have given the export version and not the bigger 560km one.
There is some talk of this being part of the Wagner/MoD feud where Wagner withdrew leaving MoD conscripts exposed.
 
Last edited:
Ok here is something different.
I am not sure I buy into it but what the hell...

Monday, May 15 (Tokyo time)

9:45 a.m. Head of the Wagner mercenary force Yevgeny Prigozhin offered to reveal the positions of Russian troops to the Ukrainian government, the Washington Post reports, citing leaked U.S. intelligence documents. According to the report, Prigozhin said that if Ukraine's commanders withdrew their soldiers from the area around Bakhmut, he would give Kyiv information on Russian troop positions, which Ukraine could use to attack them. "Prigozhin conveyed the proposal to his contacts in Ukraine's military intelligence directorate, with whom he has maintained secret communications during the course of the war," the report said, citing previously unreported U.S. intelligence documents leaked on the group-chat platform Discord.
Click to expand...

https://asia.nikkei.com/Politics/Uk...rt?utm_source=ground.news&utm_medium=referral

A number of aspects seem unlikely in this one.
 
BritinBritain said:
At the rate Putin is losing kit and personnel, surely he cannot keep this up for much longer.
Click to expand...

Wishful thinking,besides no one outside Russia knows the rate Putin is losing kit and personnel .Unless the Kremlin is giving the loss figures to the CIA and the CIA is giving them to its media .
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
He has been whining about the lack of support from the Russian military, but I doubt this. It seems absurd. The Ukrainians have a pretty good picture of where the Russians forces are without his "help"
Click to expand...

It is at best a one way ticket back to prison or a quick trip out a 6 story window if true.
 
lljadw said:
Wishful thinking,besides no one outside Russia knows the rate Putin is losing kit and personnel .Unless the Kremlin is giving the loss figures to the CIA and the CIA is giving them to its media .
Click to expand...

Not strictly true as I doubt Russia knows accurately what its losses have been, I would also suggest Ukraine has a reasonable idea of Russian casualties.

One thing I have been surprised by has been the quality of US/NATO's knowledge of Russian actions.
 
MontyB said:
Not strictly true as I doubt Russia knows accurately what its losses have been, I would also suggest Ukraine has a reasonable idea of Russian casualties.

One thing I have been surprised by has been the quality of US/NATO's knowledge of Russian actions.
Click to expand...

In WW2 Stalin's claims about German losses were ridiculous inventions, German claims about Soviet losses were not better .
British claims about German U Boat losses could not be trusted, German claims about British MV losses could not be trusted,etc,...
Why should it now be different ?
In wartime truth is the first casualty .
How can Ukraine know the number of Russian WIA and how can Russia know the number of Ukrainian KIA ?
On 1 May US said that it estimated (haha !) that Russia had lost since December 20000 KIA and 80000 WIA :how can they know ? And , if true, why would it be important ?
The Ukrainian chief prosecutor claimed that 100000 civilians had been killed, UNO said that it was 8,836.
US said that Ukraine had lost til 1 March 2023 17000 deaths and some 107000 wounded . What is the source of these figures ?The CIA or the Ukrainians themselves ?
 
lljadw said:
In WW2 Stalin's claims about German losses were ridiculous inventions, German claims about Soviet losses were not better .
British claims about German U Boat losses could not be trusted, German claims about British MV losses could not be trusted,etc,...
Why should it now be different ?
In wartime truth is the first casualty .
ElHow can Ukraine know the number of Russian WIA and how can Russia know the number of Ukrainian KIA ?
On 1 May US said that it estimated (haha !) that Russia had lost since December 20000 KIA and 80000 WIA :how can they know ? And , if true, why would it be important ?
The Ukrainian chief prosecutor claimed that 100000 civilians had been killed, UNO said that it was 8,836.
US said that Ukraine had lost til 1 March 2023 17000 deaths and some 107000 wounded . What is the source of these figures ?The CIA or the Ukrainians themselves ?
Click to expand...

You are taking things far too literally, we know both sides fudge the numbers a great example of this is that the Russians have claimed more Himars destroyed than have been made, hell they were destroying Bradley AFVs two months before they got there.

But you can draw conclusions from the data both sides give for example if the Russians say they have lost 10000 KIA and the Ukrainians claim they have killer 200000 then you can safely guess the actual number is 75k-100k.
Armoured vehicle counts I think are far more accurate as we have Oryx to give us a reasonably accurate number.

Exact numbers are irrelevant to a large degree and won't become relevant until one side falls below the critical mass needed to stay effective.

Overall you can look at progress on the ground and see how both sides are performing and it doesn't paint a great picture for the world's second army, if fact at this point they might not even be the second best army in Ukraine.
 
The US/NATO intelligence has been pretty spot on since the beginning of the war. This kind of intelligence work is what the intelligence has been doing since the beginning of having organizations doing things like this. It is much easier to detect and see what military units are doing and where they are than chasing terrorists and/or other armed civilians.
 
MontyB said:
You are taking things far too literally, we know both sides fudge the numbers a great example of this is that the Russians have claimed more Himars destroyed than have been made, hell they were destroying Bradley AFVs two months before they got there.

But you can draw conclusions from the data both sides give for example if the Russians say they have lost 10000 KIA and the Ukrainians claim they have killer 200000 then you can safely guess the actual number is 75k-100k.
Armoured vehicle counts I think are far more accurate as we have Oryx to give us a reasonably accurate number.

Exact numbers are irrelevant to a large degree and won't become relevant until one side falls below the critical mass needed to stay effective.

Overall you can look at progress on the ground and see how both sides are performing and it doesn't paint a great picture for the world's second army, if fact at this point they might not even be the second best army in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

I don't know why people are still saying that the Russian army is the second army in the world :the Russian army is not world's second army, not on any aspect .
About armoured vehicle losses :as we don't know the sources of Oryx, there is no reason to believe what Oryx is claiming .
Then there is the fundamental point that one can not draw any conclusion from casualty numbers:the Soviets lost more men in WW2 than the Germans, but the Soviets paraded in Berlin,the Germans did not parade in Moscow .
Numbers of allied MV losses are irrelevant,as what was important was not the number of MV that was lost,but the number that arrived .
Numbers of lost U Boats are also irrelevant ,because there is no causal relation between the losses of U Boats and the losses of MV :more U Boats do not mean more sinkings of MV and less U Boats do not mean less losses of MV .
If Russian losses are bigger than Ukrainian losses, this is not the cause of the Russian failure .
And if Ukrainian losses were bigger than Russian losses, this would not result in the collaps of Ukraine .
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
The US/NATO intelligence has been pretty spot on since the beginning of the war. This kind of intelligence work is what the intelligence has been doing since the beginning of having organizations doing things like this. It is much easier to detect and see what military units are doing and where they are than chasing terrorists and/or other armed civilians.
Click to expand...

But there is no causal relation between what US/NATO intelligence is doing and the outcome of the war .
The present outcome of the war would not be different if US/NATO intelligence was not interfering .
 
Today Ukraine claims ( without any proof ) that the Russians have lost 200000 men since the beginning of the war .
As there is and can't be any proof for this claim ,there is no reason to believe one word of it :only the Russians know the number of their losses .
Even if it is true, it is totally unimportant ,unless for war gamers who ''think ''that the more men you lose, the less chances you have to win .
 
lljadw said:
But there is no causal relation between what US/NATO intelligence is doing and the outcome of the war .
The present outcome of the war would not be different if US/NATO intelligence was not interfering .
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. The US/NATO intelligence provide Ukraine with information about the location of Russian HQs, logistical hubs, troop concentrations. Ukraine has killed a lot of Russian commanders, which has a huge impact on the Russian performance.
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
Yes, it is. The US/NATO intelligence provide Ukraine with information about the location of Russian HQs, logistical hubs, troop concentrations. Ukraine has killed a lot of Russian commanders, which has a huge impact on the Russian performance.
Click to expand...

I am a little bewildered by his view on this as it is even somewhat at odds with the Russian views on the matter.
 
I3BrigPvSk said:
Yes, it is. The US/NATO intelligence provide Ukraine with information about the location of Russian HQs, logistical hubs, troop concentrations. Ukraine has killed a lot of Russian commanders, which has a huge impact on the Russian performance.
Click to expand...

NO :intelligence as such is not important :you need men and weapons to kill ,if the Ukrainians had not the means to use the information, the information would be useless .
Besides, as in WW2 , most information is obsolete when it arrives .
And : the outcome of the war was decided in the first 2/3 weeks and in that period the Ukrainians had not the means to use the information of NATO ,but still the Russians failed .
It is NOT so that without the NATO information the Russians would have won .
 
MontyB said:
I am a little bewildered by his view on this as it is even somewhat at odds with the Russian views on the matter.
Click to expand...

Of course the Russians blamed NATO intelligence : they needed a scapegoat ,otherwise they had to admit that they were defeated by the Ukrainians .
Besides : there is (and can be ) no proof about the importance of Russian losses caused by Ukrainian use of NATO information .
There is no proof at all for the claim that these losses stopped the Russians and saved Ukraine . Russian losses were almost irrelevant as the outcome of the war was decided by political factors .
The whole thing of NATO information is only a modern repetition of the Ultra myth .
 
lljadw said:
Of course the Russians blamed NATO intelligence : they needed a scapegoat ,otherwise they had to admit that they were defeated by the Ukrainians .
Besides : there is (and can be ) no proof about the importance of Russian losses caused by Ukrainian use of NATO information .
There is no proof at all for the claim that these losses stopped the Russians and saved Ukraine . Russian losses were almost irrelevant as the outcome of the war was decided by political factors .
The whole thing of NATO information is only a modern repetition of the Ultra myth .
Click to expand...

And you don't think the current situation could be a result of both intelligent Ukrainian use of NATO intelligence and the Ukrainian will to fight?
If the Ukrainians had decided not to fight like the Afghans did then no amount of weaponry or intelligence from the west would have made the slightest difference but they did choose to fight and western support (weapons and intelligence) must be assisting or at the very least they would have been out of ammo long before now.

Not everything is black or white.
 
lljadw said:
NO :intelligence as such is not important :you need men and weapons to kill ,if the Ukrainians had not the means to use the information, the information would be useless .
Besides, as in WW2 , most information is obsolete when it arrives .
And : the outcome of the war was decided in the first 2/3 weeks and in that period the Ukrainians had not the means to use the information of NATO ,but still the Russians failed .
It is NOT so that without the NATO information the Russians would have won .
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. They cannot hit HQs, logistical hubs, military units without it. The information gathering and information sharing isn't like how it was during WWII
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top