Russia-Ukraine war and related tensions Megathread

[Hollywood]

To help put two certain posters “OMG Russia is winning because muh Bakmut” into perspective
https://mobile.twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1619685450624667648

It doesn't put anything into perspective, because the ISW is not providing unbiased analysis that compares genuine data of losses sustained by both sides.   According to a statement by Mark Milley, both Ukraine and Russia sustained about 100,000 casualties in the middle of November, 2022.  The Russians had conscripted an additional 300,000 troops during this time, in addition to 40,000 poorly-trained convicts that were promptly utilized to grind down Ukrainian battalions that were comprised well-trained Troops and Veterans.  According to the Western Organizations, more than 90% of the casualties sustained by Wagner are made-up of convicts, so is that a 'victory in losses' for Ukraine?

That depends on Ukraine losses.  The Russian estimate is around 25,000 casualities in the Soledar Direction.  That seems reasonable to me given the videos/photographs, and reports about certain brigades being 50-75% depleted.  Does that troop loss outweigh the tens of thousands of Russian convicts?  

First off ISW is just providing the map in the tweet so unless you’re saying the map is wrong and that Russia secretly holding more territory than anyone else including them are reporting then the accusations of bias make no sense in the context. Second your entire argument rests on the idea that Russian human wave attacks are somehow going to be effective in the long run and that Ukraine can’t get enough people into their army to replenish losses and the facts on the ground heavily dispute both notions

I don't care about the map.  I'm referring to the comment made by ISW advisor in his tweet.  He refers to 'losses' as a more pertinent factor than 'ground changing hands'.  My statements regarding the ISW bias was just a triggered response to some of the nonsense that they've published in the past, so you're correct that my accusations "make no sense" in this context. I'm only human.  

In regards to your next point, I'm not arguing that "Russian human wave attacks are... going to be effective in the long-run".  Soledar is the first battle in which the Russians truly utilized human wave attacks that look just like, if not worse then, the Ukrainians tactics utilized during the Cherson Offensive.  Eventually, they Russians are going to run out of prisoners if the casualties are accurate, but I imagine the Ukraine Ministry of Defense is over-exaggerating that number for morale.  

In addition, I don't think the Ukrainians can replenish their well-trained soldiers, because I've seen images of older recruits, and a couple of videos where they're dragging geriatrics off the street for service.  

LOL Facts on the Ground?  The first casualty of war is the truth.  

If you’re going to argue that Ukraine can’t replace it’s loses based off of images you see then it’s pretty hypocritical to refer to Russia as a “solid army” when we have a lot of images of these conscripts Russia is bringing in are poorly equipped, cloathed, trained, and demoralized to the point they wouldn’t be effective

Did I say Russia sent a solid army into Ukraine?  My main contention for several months is that Russia failed to invade Ukraine with enough trained soldiers.  It's clear now that Russia over-confident in believing they could conquer a country of 40-50 with a force of only 150,000 that was bolstered by poorly-trained and equipped LPR and DPR militia.  The Ukrainians were able to run through the LPR in Kharkiv, and easily repel the DPR.  This group is where you'll find the majority of casualties just like the convicts were a vast majority in the battle for Soledar.  When you look at those images, are you able to distinguish between former Ukrainians that fought as DPR and Russian Soldiers?  No.  Over the last three weeks, I've seen so many people confuse 'Wagnerites' for convicts. 

The reality on the ground is that the best AFU troops are slowly getting ground down by a combination 10,000 contractors/Soldiers in each direction that are bolstered by tens of thousands of untrained convicts, LPR and DPR forces.  This is just the beginning of a larger offensive for Spring.  Per Sun, "Kyiv has warned that Russia is preparing to call up another 500,000 conscripts to refresh its decimated military - in addition to 300,000 who were called up in October.  Russian outlet Volya Media reported that Russia could be gearing up for a new offensive involving up to 700,000 soldiers." https://www.the-sun.com/news/7163186/putin-ukraine-russia-700000-troops/

It's a sad situation. 

[Hollywood]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/jan/28/russia-ukraine-war-zelenskiy-says-frontline-fighting-in-east-extremely-acute-live

"Ukraine struggling to hold Bakhmut, military sources say"

The risk of Bakhmut being encircled was said to be growing, with Ukraine’s army facing shortages of artillery that could hold back the advancing Russian forces.

There are whispers of a slow withdrawal, but I'll wait until we get some videos of the AFU walking with their heads down.  It took about 2 or 3 days before we saw Ukrainians retreat from Soledar. 

[Hindsight was 2020]

To help put two certain posters “OMG Russia is winning because muh Bakmut” into perspective
https://mobile.twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1619685450624667648

It doesn't put anything into perspective, because the ISW is not providing unbiased analysis that compares genuine data of losses sustained by both sides.   According to a statement by Mark Milley, both Ukraine and Russia sustained about 100,000 casualties in the middle of November, 2022.  The Russians had conscripted an additional 300,000 troops during this time, in addition to 40,000 poorly-trained convicts that were promptly utilized to grind down Ukrainian battalions that were comprised well-trained Troops and Veterans.  According to the Western Organizations, more than 90% of the casualties sustained by Wagner are made-up of convicts, so is that a 'victory in losses' for Ukraine?

That depends on Ukraine losses.  The Russian estimate is around 25,000 casualities in the Soledar Direction.  That seems reasonable to me given the videos/photographs, and reports about certain brigades being 50-75% depleted.  Does that troop loss outweigh the tens of thousands of Russian convicts?  

First off ISW is just providing the map in the tweet so unless you’re saying the map is wrong and that Russia secretly holding more territory than anyone else including them are reporting then the accusations of bias make no sense in the context. Second your entire argument rests on the idea that Russian human wave attacks are somehow going to be effective in the long run and that Ukraine can’t get enough people into their army to replenish losses and the facts on the ground heavily dispute both notions

I don't care about the map.  I'm referring to the comment made by ISW advisor in his tweet.  He refers to 'losses' as a more pertinent factor than 'ground changing hands'.  My statements regarding the ISW bias was just a triggered response to some of the nonsense that they've published in the past, so you're correct that my accusations "make no sense" in this context. I'm only human.  

In regards to your next point, I'm not arguing that "Russian human wave attacks are... going to be effective in the long-run".  Soledar is the first battle in which the Russians truly utilized human wave attacks that look just like, if not worse then, the Ukrainians tactics utilized during the Cherson Offensive.  Eventually, they Russians are going to run out of prisoners if the casualties are accurate, but I imagine the Ukraine Ministry of Defense is over-exaggerating that number for morale.  

In addition, I don't think the Ukrainians can replenish their well-trained soldiers, because I've seen images of older recruits, and a couple of videos where they're dragging geriatrics off the street for service.  

LOL Facts on the Ground?  The first casualty of war is the truth.  

If you’re going to argue that Ukraine can’t replace it’s loses based off of images you see then it’s pretty hypocritical to refer to Russia as a “solid army” when we have a lot of images of these conscripts Russia is bringing in are poorly equipped, cloathed, trained, and demoralized to the point they wouldn’t be effective

Did I say Russia sent a solid army into Ukraine?  My main contention for several months is that Russia failed to invade Ukraine with enough trained soldiers.  It's clear now that Russia over-confident in believing they could conquer a country of 40-50 with a force of only 150,000 that was bolstered by poorly-trained and equipped LPR and DPR militia.  The Ukrainians were able to run through the LPR in Kharkiv, and easily repel the DPR.  This group is where you'll find the majority of casualties just like the convicts were a vast majority in the battle for Soledar.  When you look at those images, are you able to distinguish between former Ukrainians that fought as DPR and Russian Soldiers?  No.  Over the last three weeks, I've seen so many people confuse 'Wagnerites' for convicts. 

The reality on the ground is that the best AFU troops are slowly getting ground down by a combination 10,000 contractors/Soldiers in each direction that are bolstered by tens of thousands of untrained convicts, LPR and DPR forces.  This is just the beginning of a larger offensive for Spring.  Per Sun, "Kyiv has warned that Russia is preparing to call up another 500,000 conscripts to refresh its decimated military - in addition to 300,000 who were called up in October.  Russian outlet Volya Media reported that Russia could be gearing up for a new offensive involving up to 700,000 soldiers." https://www.the-sun.com/news/7163186/putin-ukraine-russia-700000-troops/

It's a sad situation. 

Oh so all of Russia’s loses are due to the LPR and DPR forces, Ukraine has lost all their best troops in Bakmut, and all these new Russian conscripts are going to be magically transformed into an effective fighting force. I mean this fantasy land you live in is pretty depressing so thankfully that’s not reality

[Hindsight was 2020]

can we stop arguing with obvious trolls please

Sorry you’re right, shouldn’t even bother

[Cassius]

Bakhmut will fall around mid-February (IMO).

and if you are right it will only have taken them 6 months and 40,000 dead to do it and losing huge swaths of land elsewhere.  What a great victory for the Motherland!  How many more of these "victories" can the Russians pull off?  I hope a lot.

Ne ego si iterum eodem modo vicero, sine ullo milite Epirum revertar.

Doesn't really work in this case given that it was Pyrrhus who had fewer but better quality troops, hence why he couldn't afford to lose them. Putin's forces (generally) don't appear to be as good man-for-man as those of the Ukrainians but he has more at this point to call upon than they do.

[Woody]

I think moving forward as this war progress, users here need to accept the harsh reality/minimum outcome:

1. Ukraine will never return to it's borders of 91' or 14' (Crimea/parts of Donbass and the south)
2. Ukraine will never join NATO or EU
3. Russia is not collapsing (Putin stepping down is also a significant longshot)

..Whether Kyiv survives regime change, however, is another question.

[Hindsight was 2020]

I think moving forward as this war progress, users here need to accept the harsh reality/minimum outcome:

1. Ukraine will never return to it's borders of 91' or 14' (Crimea/parts of Donbass and the south)
2. Ukraine will never join NATO or EU
3. Russia is not collapsing (Putin stepping down is also a significant longshot)

..Whether Kyiv survives regime change, however, is another question.

Anyone want a good laugh? Check out the time stamp on this post

https://twitter.com/cvetko35/status/1585544622297735168?cxt=HHwWgICzud6b_oAsAAAA

[dead0man]

Bakhmut will fall around mid-February (IMO).

and if you are right it will only have taken them 6 months and 40,000 dead to do it and losing huge swaths of land elsewhere.  What a great victory for the Motherland!  How many more of these "victories" can the Russians pull off?  I hope a lot.

Don't know where you got that number from.

are your handlers giving you a different number?  It would be interesting to know what that number is.  I made up the 40k number, but even if it's half that it's still not good for your buddy Putin.

I think moving forward as this war progress, users here need to accept the harsh reality/minimum outcome:

maybe you could give us some advice on how to handle this as you've had plenty experience with it over the course of the war.  Maybe there will be one battle we can focus on where nothing seems to change for months at a time, ignoring everything that doesn't fit the narrative that we want?  It seems to be how you've handled it.

[Woody]

Bakhmut will fall around mid-February (IMO).

and if you are right it will only have taken them 6 months and 40,000 dead to do it and losing huge swaths of land elsewhere.  What a great victory for the Motherland!  How many more of these "victories" can the Russians pull off?  I hope a lot.

Don't know where you got that number from.

are your handlers giving you a different number?  It would be interesting to know what that number is.  I made up the 40k number, but even if it's half that it's still not good for your buddy Putin.

I think moving forward as this war progress, users here need to accept the harsh reality/minimum outcome:

maybe you could give us some advice on how to handle this as you've had plenty experience with it over the course of the war.  Maybe there will be one battle we can focus on where nothing seems to change for months at a time, ignoring everything that doesn't fit the narrative that we want?  It seems to be how you've handled it.

What's with the hostility, I am just giving my opinion. Are all Nebraskans that bold?

[CanadianDemocrat]

To help put two certain posters “OMG Russia is winning because muh Bakmut” into perspective
https://mobile.twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1619685450624667648

It doesn't put anything into perspective, because the ISW is not providing unbiased analysis that compares genuine data of losses sustained by both sides.   According to a statement by Mark Milley, both Ukraine and Russia sustained about 100,000 casualties in the middle of November, 2022.  The Russians had conscripted an additional 300,000 troops during this time, in addition to 40,000 poorly-trained convicts that were promptly utilized to grind down Ukrainian battalions that were comprised well-trained Troops and Veterans.  According to the Western Organizations, more than 90% of the casualties sustained by Wagner are made-up of convicts, so is that a 'victory in losses' for Ukraine?

That depends on Ukraine losses.  The Russian estimate is around 25,000 casualities in the Soledar Direction.  That seems reasonable to me given the videos/photographs, and reports about certain brigades being 50-75% depleted.  Does that troop loss outweigh the tens of thousands of Russian convicts?  

First off ISW is just providing the map in the tweet so unless you’re saying the map is wrong and that Russia secretly holding more territory than anyone else including them are reporting then the accusations of bias make no sense in the context. Second your entire argument rests on the idea that Russian human wave attacks are somehow going to be effective in the long run and that Ukraine can’t get enough people into their army to replenish losses and the facts on the ground heavily dispute both notions

Russia doesn't have enough soldiers to launch human wave offensives like they did in World War 2. Ukraine has the manpower advantage, they have 900,000 soldiers in the armed forces. Ukraine did a total mobilization a few days after the war started.

The media and Russia says that Ukraine is outnumbered 10 to 1. Ukraine has more soldiers then Russia.

[CumbrianLefty]

I think moving forward as this war progress, users here need to accept the harsh reality/minimum outcome:

1. Ukraine will never return to it's borders of 91' or 14' (Crimea/parts of Donbass and the south)
2. Ukraine will never join NATO or EU
3. Russia is not collapsing (Putin stepping down is also a significant longshot)

..Whether Kyiv survives regime change, however, is another question.

Anyone want a good laugh? Check out the time stamp on this post

https://twitter.com/cvetko35/status/1585544622297735168?cxt=HHwWgICzud6b_oAsAAAA

The real point is that even if said statement was true at the time, it didn't matter in the longer term.

[jaichind]

https://www.reuters.com/world/natos-chief-urges-south-korea-step-up-military-support-ukraine-2023-01-30/

"NATO's chief urges South Korea to step up military support for Ukraine"

The main problem is ROK has rules against providing arms to warzones but I guess that is what Stoltenberg is trying to change.

[jaichind]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64397745

"Ukraine: Boris Johnson says Putin threatened him with missile strike"

I wonder if Johnson has a recording of this threat that he can release.  I would be very interested in the exact wording Putin used.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64397745

"Ukraine: Boris Johnson says Putin threatened him with missile strike"

I wonder if Johnson has a recording of this threat that he can release.  I would be very interested in the exact wording Putin used.

Maybe Putin was saying that with another year of Tory leadership, even the missiles would be on strike?

[CumbrianLefty]

With without hard evidence its not the most reliable source, one has to say that

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://mobile.twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1620040223655870465

[jaichind]

If we recursively apply all the logic that led up to sending Abrams tanks and now likely F-16 would not the end result be the headline "Biden and Pentagon warming up to the idea of sending strategic nuclear weapons to Ukraine"?

[Hindsight was 2020]

If we recursively apply all the logic that led up to sending Abrams tanks and now likely F-16 would not the end result be the headline "Biden and Pentagon warming up to the idea of sending strategic nuclear weapons to Ukraine"?

That would be based but no there is a world of difference between giving Ukraine modern/better tanks and airplanes and nukes

[Storr]

It looks repairable, but at least it's out of service for now: https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/status/1619774580637458434?s=20&t=fGGzQh...

https://twitter.com/sjrcdude/status/1620031519371976704?s=20&t=JxT2P65B2q4Wx...

[lfromnj]

If the rumors about the jets are true it seems that the opposition from the Pentagon over the Abrams being given was genuine rather than being cheap.

[Woody]

https://twitter.com/NewsUkrainenews/status/1620079207455023104

[jaichind]

If the rumors about the jets are true it seems that the opposition from the Pentagon over the Abrams being given was genuine rather than being cheap.

That would make sense.  The logistical, maintenance and training overhead of the Abrams would make the ROI fairly poor in terms of benefit for Ukraine on the battlefield.

[Storr]

https://mobile.twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1620040223655870465

https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1619619273584037889?s=20&t=4sVis4ch...

[Torie]

Remember this guy?

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1620109215141593088?s=20&t=4TnQ2c7qlgYHx5-QeyWMQA

[jaichind]

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/3836519-biden-says-us-wont-provide-ukraine-with-f-16s/

"Biden says US won’t provide Ukraine with F-16s"

Lets see how long this position lasts.