The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

[STURM]

I think it was the correct decision from their command structure.

Ultimately, I think Russia is making the correct decision for them, in realizing that the Kherson front was going to be a slow, expensive disaster if they stayed there.

Plainly obvious it was a correct decision. What else could could they have done? Keeping troops where they were would have seen their flanks turned and a pocket formed; the Russians can't mount an offensive in a different sector to draw away the Ukrainians and they also didn't have the operational reserves to pour into Kherson city.

They've proven wholly incapable of fighting a multi-front war.

Are they really? For the past few months no doubt but if from the onset the army went in prepared for a protracted high intensity fight and had fully mobilised would the same problems have occurred? Maybe, maybe not.

while their is evidence that Russian replacements are being sent with lesser equipment, from antiquated small arms, to older, less capable armor.

What ''antiquated small arms''? The Mosin Nagants? That's been done to death here and it's not as if whole sections or platoons have been seen with them. The Ukrainians have been seen with M2 12.7mm HMGs - this was first designed in the 1910's. Up to a few months ago there were pics showing Ukrainian Maxims which are even more ''antiquated'' than the Mosin Nagants.



As for ''older, less capable armor'' no doubt but if they do the job. I'll also remind you that not all Ukrainian units are as well equipped as the ones we see in pics.

As long as the flow of equipment from the west keeps up, it will continue to keep the death toll high for the Russians, who I believe will focus on trying to consolidate their games in Luhansk and Donetsk.

I'll wait and see how things pan out over the next few months.

We keep hearing more about the Russians and less of the Ukrainians. They too are tired and they've suffered terrible losses. At present they have the momentum and they have the moral but all these things don't operate in a vacuum; the Russians are down and very much so but they still have the capacity to sustain this war for quite a while more; irrespective of all the reports we've been fed with over these past few months giving the impression that a badly led, trained and equipped Russian army which had a low moral was close to collapsing. No doubt if this war drags on for another 6 months we'll still hear reports [whether over optimistic ones; exaggeration or plain disinformation] about how the Russians are on their last legs. I'll wait and see before forming any conclusions.

 

[IIO2]

An ugly conversation, of course, but now that the war seemingly will be focused in a 400'ish KM stretch between Zaporizhzhia and Svatove, the question becomes the following...

What can the West provide Ukraine to maximize Russian casualties after their recent round of mobilization and how can they help inflict as much death as possible in an attempt to draw the ire amongst the Russian population towards their government. Like it, or not, tens of thousands more Russian sons, husbands and fathers have to be killed in Ukraine, before the population has simply had enough or the government throwing the men into the meat grinder.

Here are the easiest CONVENTIONAL methods for the West to help the Ukrainians inflict mass casualties, IMO.

- M109 Howitzers. Italy is sending 20-30 more that they're taking out of storage. The United States has more than 1000 of them, many of which will not be upgraded to M109A7 standard, but are still plenty new and capable enough to counter the Russians. Undoubtedly, the Russians have been achieving greater success in recent months of locating and destroying Ukrainian artillery. The U.S. can easily spare 100 M109's. They don't need to all be sent at once. Rather, if send approximately 18 (3 batteries worth) per month, for the next 5 months, that gives you time to train additional crews in places like Poland and Germany, before sending them.

- Krab Howitzers. Ukraine ordered 48 Krabs, over an above what Poland donated to Ukraine. Every attempt should be made by the West to have Poland send many of their existing Krabs to Ukraine in the coming months, backfilling their own with the new ones Ukraine ordered, as they role off the assembly line.

- Panzerhaubtize 2000's. Quite frankly, between Germany, Italy and the Netherlands, I'd like to see them send a few more each, maybe a total of 18 (3 batteries) between the 3 nations. Again, the idea would be to backfill their own armies, as the ones Ukraine ordered from Germany roll off the assembly line. Ukraine needs them now. These other countries can afford to get new ones starting a year from now.

- Archer. The Swedes are, apparently, considering sending it, and it would be a great if they did. Obviously, they won't be sending large quantities, but even 6-12 could make a big difference in helping increase Ukrainian artillery effectiveness. With France unlikely to send more than the 24 CAESARS they've already sent, adding Archers into the mix, at the right time, would be a nice influx of new Western technology.

- Airburst munitions, GPS guided munitions (Excalibur), SMart munitions, etc... These expensive, but highly effective 155mm rounds are already being sent to Ukraine, but digging deeper into existing quantities, while simultaneously ramping up production, will be key. These types of rounds particularly disheartening for Russian infantry and armor, because they are deadly accurate and effective. While costly, they're exceptional killing weapons and their use needs to be maximized vs quality targets, as much as possible.

- Drones, Drones and more Drones. The Ukrainians have had success retrofitting drones to drop grenades and mortar rounds. Western drone countries across Europe and North America ought to be retrofitting their commercial drones for sale to the Ukrainian military. You can severely damage Russian morale and maximize casualties over the winter months, when ill-equipped Russians are freezing in the winter weather and they're constantly terrified about death from above. Russia, to their credit, has upped their drone game substantially over the last couple months. Between the success they're having with their Lancet drones and their ability to deeply the Shahed drones they got from Iran, they're doing a good job in that space. It's time for the Ukrainians (via their backers) to step their game up and develop an overwhelming fleet of retrofitted drones, increasingly more capable of raining down death on mobilized Russians.

 

[Ananda]

Like it, or not, tens of thousands more Russian sons, husbands and fathers have to be killed in Ukraine, before the population has simply had enough or the government throwing the men into the meat grinder.

Is Ukraine now also not send to greet Russian Meat Grinders ? Is Ukraine conscript also not become cannon fodders ? Like it or not more likely at this moment Ukranian soldiers are killed outnumbered then Russian ones, simply as they are more numerous in the ground. Their numbers fall under Russian barrage is more. However their numbers due matter to push back Russian in Kharkiv and now in West Bank of Dniper in Kherson.

If average Russian convinces they are fighting for their Russian brethen in Southeast Ukraine, if they are convince those Southest Ukraine is Russian land (as it is part of Russia before USSR administrative division), then they will fight even with more costs.

This war will bleed more Ukranian and Russian blood, and no end in sight yet.

 

[STURM]

The Swedes are, apparently, considering sending it, and it would be a great if they did.

Would be great but only if the Ukrainians see a need for it. They currently have M-109s, Panzerhaubtize 2000's, Krabs, Zuzanas, Caesars, FH-70s, Light Guns and the various pre war kit they have; all having little or nothing in common spares wise.

even 6-12 could make a big difference in helping increase Ukrainian artillery effectiveness

How so? What will a battery's worth of Archers do that present that SPHs can't? Does it have to be Archers per see to ''increase Ukrainian artillery effectiveness'' or can it be done by others systems?

The Ukrainians have had success retrofitting drones to drop grenades and mortar rounds. Western drone countries across Europe and North America ought to be retrofitting their commercial drones for sale to the Ukrainian military. You can severely damage Russian morale and maximize casualties over the winter months

This is something non state actors in the Middle East first did in 2015/2016; albeit with less apparent success. ''Retrofitting drones to drop grenades and mortar rounds'' is also something the Russians have been doing.

Russia, to their credit, has upped their drone game substantially over the last couple months.

To be expected and they did after all deploy UASs in an extremely effective manner in the Donbas campaign years ago. It can be argued that during that period the Russians were the most successful UAS practitioners at a tactical and operational level.

Like with EW the early stages of the campaign didn't see the Russians deploying UASs as effectively as they could but gradually things changed. The fact that we saw more footage of Ukrainian UAS strikes played a large part in shaping perception.

It's time for the Ukrainians (via their backers) to step their game up and develop an overwhelming fleet of retrofitted drones, increasingly more capable of raining down death on mobilized Russians.

The problem is the Russians are also attempting to do the same thing; ''raining down death''.

 

[relic88]

I saw a crossing by small boats of approx 40 Ukranian troops going to the East or left bank of the Dnipro River West of the Nova Khoghva( sp?) Dam on a YT channel called the " Enforcer" that is unabashedly pro Ukranian. I can't seem to locate a clean video . I will look for it. Ukranian officials have spoken on their Telegram channels of liberating the Kinburn Peninsula next .
From what I gather the situation on the East bank of Khearson Oblast is now very much fluid. Supposedly the Russians are actually digging new defensive lines in Crimea so the future of the Russian occupation of East or South Khearson is hard to predict. I am looking for more concrete updates.
Leftyhunter

Yes be careful with "enforcer", very one sided and nearly void of real all around knowledge. I don't particular like the segments featuring POWs.

 

[IIO2]

Plainly obvious it was a correct decision. What else could could they have done? Keeping troops where they were would have seen their flanks turned and a pocket formed; the Russians can't mount an offensive in a different sector to draw away the Ukrainians and they also didn't have the operational reserves to pour into Kherson city.



Are they really? For the past few months no doubt but if from the onset the army went in prepared for a protracted high intensity fight and had fully mobilised would the same problems have occurred? Maybe, maybe not.



What ''antiquated small arms''? The Mosin Nagants? That's been done to death here and it's not as if whole sections or platoons have been seen with them. The Ukrainians have been seen with M2 12.7mm HMGs - this was first designed in the 1910's. Up to a few months ago there were pics showing Ukrainian Maxims which are even more ''antiquated'' than the Mosin Nagants.

View attachment 49881

As for ''older, less capable armor'' no doubt but if they do the job. I'll also remind you that not all Ukrainian units are as well equipped as the ones we see in pics.



I'll wait and see how things pan out over the next few months.

We keep hearing more about the Russians and less of the Ukrainians. They too are tired and they've suffered terrible losses. At present they have the momentum and they have the moral but all these things don't operate in a vacuum; the Russians are down and very much so but they still have the capacity to sustain this war for quite a while more; irrespective of all the reports we've been fed with over these past few months giving the impression that a badly led, trained and equipped Russian army which had a low moral was close to collapsing. No doubt if this war drags on for another 6 months we'll still hear reports [whether over optimistic ones; exaggeration or plain disinformation] about how the Russians are on their last legs. I'll wait and see before forming any conclusions.

The key difference is that while both armies are tired and suffering high rates of casualties, if the Ukrainians stop fighting, they cease to exist as nation and all of their struggle to this point will be for not. They will simply become the Russian puppet state that they've spent the last 9+ months resisting becoming... Where as if the Russians stop fighting, they simply go home to their loved ones and live the rest of their lives. They're not fighting for their survival, regardless of what delusions of grandeur their political leadership is cooking up about Russia being at existential risk of NATO invading Russia, or threatening Russian sovereignty.

As for the equipment issue... There have been countless videos published of mobilized Russians being asked to bring their own kit to the front and to have their own families buy it for them. There have been more videos of mobilized men showing the rusted out rifles they're being issued. There having been notable issues with the bulletproof vests that the Russian are being issued... If you need me to post a whole host of videos, I'm happy to oblige.

As for the Russian armor, a T-62 is better than nothing, but the older, less capable the Russian equipment, the more vulnerable it is to modern Western weapons. It goes without saying that while the T-90's haven't performed particularly well in this war, I think Ukrainians would rather combat an antiquated tank, rather than a modern one. I also think the old T-72s and T-62's are much easier kill targets for everything from the Stugna-P's and TOWs that Ukrainians are using, to the Hellfire missiles that are starting to trickle in from the West, to the Javelins, NLAWs, Panzerfausts and Milans that have had reasonable success since the start of the war. The T-62's per minute fire rate lags behind its Western adversaries and its armor is more vulnerable than it's newer successors. These T-62s (not unlike the Ukrainian T-64s) will largely be death traps for Russian crews, IMO.

 

[relic88]

My gut feeling is that the Russians will not want to concede anything more and that they have had the time to shore up a defense on "their" side of the Dnipro River. It remains to be seen if they can even do that as Ukraine seems to be counting the pursuit.

 

[IIO2]

Would be great but only if the Ukrainians see a need for it. They currently have M-109s, Panzerhaubtize 2000's, Krabs, Zuzanas, Caesars, FH-70s, Light Guns and the various pre war kit they have; all having little or nothing in common spares wise.



How so? What will a battery's worth of Archers do that present that SPHs can't? Does it have to be Archers per see to ''increase Ukrainian artillery effectiveness'' or can it be done by others systems?



This is something non state actors in the Middle East first did in 20152016; albeit with less apparent success. Something the Russians are also dong.



To be expected and they did after all deploy UASs in an extremely effective manner in the Donbas campaign years ago. Like with EW the early stages of the campaign didn't see the Russians deploying UASs as effectively as they could but gradually things changed. The fact that we saw more footage of Ukrainian UAS strikes played a large part in shaping perception.



The problem is the Russians are also attempting to do the same thing; ''raining down death''.

In response to your question about the Archers. It's important that Western aid stay intact, if not be ramped up further. With France unlikely to send anymore CAESARs (beyond the 24 they've committed) for the foreseeable future, and the Czechs likely out of Danas that they can send, it's important that Western in flows continue. So if you lose access to procuring a system (CAESAR for example) you want to be able to replace it with access to an equally effective system (Archer for example). It keeps your supply stream strong. I think the West will be able to keep in in flow of M109s up. I expect some new Zuzanas to arrive in 2023. I expect more Krabs to arrive in 2023. I expect a limited number for Panzerhaubitze 2000s at some point as well. But in terms of SPG's, that's really it. We know the United States ordered more M777's for Ukraine, but those ones have to be built and who knows how many more FH70's can be provided at this point. I doubt it's many.

 

[STURM]

The key difference is that while both armies are tired and suffering high rates of casualties, if the Ukrainians stop fighting, they cease to exist as nation

The discussion was the fact that both armies are tired and attrited.

As for the equipment issue... There have been countless videos published of mobilized Russians being asked to bring their own kit to the front and to have their own families buy it for them. There have been more videos of mobilized men showing the rusted out rifles they're being issued. There having been notable issues with the bulletproof vests that the Russian are being issued... If you need me to post a whole host of videos, I'm happy to oblige.

Sorry but is all this a revelation? Is it new news here? Did anyone say that the Russians are not being equipped with old kit? I merely pointed out that issue of Mosin Nagants has been done to death; it's not as if whole regiments of Russians have been equipped with it and it's not as if similarly ''antiquated'' kit is not being used by the other side.

These T-62s (not unlike the Ukrainian T-64s) will largely be death traps for Russian crews, IMO.

Any MBT not protected properly and not deployed as part of combined arms formations will be ''death traps''.

 

[STURM]

In response to your question about the Archers.

I fail to see how Archer [great gun it is] will add any value over the long list of arty systems the Ukrainians already have. I also fail to see how adding Archer in the mix will not lead to sustainment issues as the Ukrainians already have a very long list of arty systems in service; each with different parts and each requiring crews to be trained on.

 

[seaspear]

In regards to the T-90m tanks Russia have and also deployed ,there have been claims via Oryx of 30 destroyed or captured its difficult to find how many of the various models of T-90 are currently used by Russia in this conflict or even which forces Russia have ,have access to these tanks and where deployed , I would expect this model of tank to be the most potent in this conflict
T-90M Main Battle Tank | Military-Today.com

 

[IIO2]

Is Ukraine now also not send to greet Russian Meat Grinders ? Is Ukraine conscript also not become cannon fodders ? Like it or not more likely at this moment Ukranian soldiers are killed outnumbered then Russian ones, simply as they are more numerous in the ground. Their numbers fall under Russian barrage is more. However their numbers due matter to push back Russian in Kharkiv and now in West Bank of Dniper in Kherson.

If average Russian convinces they are fighting for their Russian brethen in Southeast Ukraine, if they are convince those Southest Ukraine is Russian land (as it is part of Russia before USSR administrative division), then they will fight even with more costs.

This war will bleed more Ukranian and Russian blood, and no end in sight yet.

Of course this war will bleed A LOT of Ukrainian blood, but they have no other choice but to bleed. If they surrender and capitulate, they cease to exist as a nation and are forced to exist as a puppet, under Russian tyranny. Russian's, on the other hand, can leave tomorrow. There is no existential threat to Russian sovereignty. Nobody is invading Russia and trying to end their existence as a nation.

These types of conflicts have a long history of the defender, ultimately persevering, as long as they're willing to bleed to do it. In most instances, see Germany's march into the Soviet Union, The American debacle in Vietnam, the Korean War, hell, even Afghanistan for both the Russians and Americans to a certain extent. Eventually, it become fruitless to invade a country that does not want to be conquered. It goes without saying that Ukrainians can, reasonably field 2-3 million soldiers over the coming 2-3 years, should they be required to, as long as Western support does not stop. Needless to say, Russia has a choice to make. They either field an army capable of destroying not only what Ukraine is fielding now, but what they are capable of fielding should they get desperate, or they turn around, go home and cut their losses. What they're doing right now, is not effective. They're months behind the Ukrainians in terms of mobilization. They're starting to show real signs of their soldiers being less and less equipped as they leave for combat, while Ukrainian soldiers are training in places like Britain, Poland, and soon, other Western countries, being sent back to the battlefield with modern, Western kit. I'm curious to see what happens as winter hits. Something tells me that Russians that currently exist at the front are going to be hard pressed to get re-supplied with appropriate winter clothing. Meanwhile, we've already seen massive, public commitments from countries like the Canada, USA, Britain and Sweden, to ensure the Ukrainian army is as kitted out for the winter as can be expected considering the live nature of the conflict. Russian logistics have been hot garbage in all other areas of this war, I don't imagine it will be much better when it comes to providing appropriate winter clothing, especially to front line troops.

 

[IIO2]

I fail to see how Archer [great gun it is] will add any value over the long list of arty systems the Ukrainians already have. I also fail to see how adding Archer in the mix will not lead to sustainment issues as the Ukrainians already have a very long list of arty systems in service; each with different parts and each requiring crews to be trained on.

Again, simply put, if the French can no longer send CAESARs, access to a new SPG is beneficial for keeping up the pace of the war effort. The Ukrainians are experiencing attrition among their howitzers, they must continue to be replaced in order for the war to be won. If the French say "sorry, we can't give you anymore right now", the Swedes become an interesting player in that they have a system, some of which they could likely spare, that could replace the French influx of CAESARs as that supply dries up.

I understand the logistical problem is presents, but that's the reality of the war Ukraine is fighting. If they could get there hands on 200-300 of one type of system, with tons of spare parts, they'd almost certainly take that option. Unfortunately, the only system that could be realistically sent in those type of quantities would be the M109 (most of which would have to come from the USA) and I don't think you'll see anyone (even the Americans) make that level of asset commitment. At least not in the short term.

 

[seaspear]

This article from the New York Times suggests some of the difficulties for both sides for winter

Winter Will Be a Major Factor in the Ukraine War, Officials Say (Published 2022)

Both sides are expected to pause operations. But heavy snows and freezing temperatures could make it difficult for the poorly equipped Russian army to regroup.

www.nytimes.com

This article suggests a milder winter this could also mean less frozen ground for heavy vehicles with the ground staying muddy for longer?
I have an article here from march on the effects of frostbite on Russian troops, I haven't come across any articles to suggest that Russia is better prepared to handle winter again in Ukraine in the trenches
Leaked audio: Russian officer says half his soldiers have frostbite | American Military News

Weather forecasters predict relatively mild winter in Ukraine | Euronews

 

[IIO2]

The discussion was the fact that both armies are tired and attrited.



Sorry but is all this a revelation? Is it new news here? Did anyone say that the Russians are not being equipped with old kit? I merely pointed out that issue of Mosin Nagants has been done to death; it's not as if whole regiments of Russians have been equipped with it and it's not as if similarly ''antiquated'' kit is not being used by the other side.



Any MBT not protected properly and not deployed as part of combined arms formations will be ''death traps''.

You're now asking questions, but failing to address my actual arguments.

1). Of course both armies are tired and have faced substantial attrition. My point is that for one army, the choice of laying down their weapons because of their fatigue, has a lot more dire consequences.

2). I made the claim that Russian's are increasingly being sent into combat with older, less capable equipment. I never raised the issue of the Mosin Nagants. In fact, I never once referenced them. You brought them up after having that conversation with another poster. I specifically referenced poor quality, rusted rifles (the videos I've seen are of poor quality Kalashnikovs), poor quality body armor and older model tanks. It's a relevant point in that as the Ukrainian replacement troops are coming back from places like Britain, kitted out with modern western equipment, making them better equipped than many of their dead brethren that they're replacing, the Russians are having the opposite happen. Their replacements are being issues worse kit, not better. In the aggregate, things like that matter in the outcome of conflicts.

3. Your point about MBTs is a given, but it would be disingenuous for anyone to argue that Russian armored ability isn't degraded every time they lose a modern / semi-modern T-80 variant or T-90 variant, and are forced to replace it with an older model T-72 or T-62. That's a pretty easy argument to arrive at.

 

[IIO2]

This article from the New York Times suggests some of the difficulties for both sides for winter

Winter Will Be a Major Factor in the Ukraine War, Officials Say (Published 2022)

Both sides are expected to pause operations. But heavy snows and freezing temperatures could make it difficult for the poorly equipped Russian army to regroup.

www.nytimes.com

This article suggests a milder winter this could also mean less frozen ground for heavy vehicles with the ground staying muddy for longer?
I have an article here from march on the effects of frostbite on Russian troops, I haven't come across any articles to suggest that Russia is better prepared to handle winter again in Ukraine in the trenches
Leaked audio: Russian officer says half his soldiers have frostbite | American Military News

Weather forecasters predict relatively mild winter in Ukraine | Euronews

The winter, obviously, presents its own set of challenges and neither army will be immune from them. They'll both have to face the conditions and survival will be less comfortable. What we've seen to this point, however, has been solid (not great) logistics from the Ukrainians, which would be expected given their "home field advantage". What we've seen from the Russians, however, have been horrendous logistics, particularly in any instances in which they attempted significant, prolonged advances. I suspect they'll try to improve their logistics over the course of the winter months, to ensure that their soldiers are properly supplied, but to this point, we've seen no practical indications of their military logistics being worth a damn, so color me skeptical.

 

[Ananda]

There is no existential threat to Russian sovereignty. Nobody is invading Russia and trying to end their existence as a nation.

That's what western side believe, not Russian. I mean Russian in here not their leadership, but looking on their online sites, telegrams, save to say average Russian.

I put this picture in this thread, early in this war. This is the map of Russian inland waterways system. Russian see this as their blood line since the time of Empire. See where the waterways ended in Black Sea, it is in Sea of Azov. Which is guarded by Crimea and and the four oblasts in Southeast Ukraine. Fact is before USSR administrative division, those four oblasts is under Russia administration.

They know they have failed to change Ukraine regime, they know they have failed to get Ukraine as Neutral State. Thus they will fight for those oblasts as this is their 'minimum' aim. So I don't see they will leave this four oblasts (Luhantsk, Donentsk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson). They need much of those four oblasts to safe guard sea of azov and crimea.

As it is stand now, despite all their set backs, they are still controling much of those four oblasts. If average Russian believe southeast Ukraine is their land, it is reside by mostly their brethen, again they will fight.

 

[tonnyc]

What can the West provide Ukraine to maximize Russian casualties after their recent round of mobilization and how can they help inflict as much death as possible in an attempt to draw the ire amongst the Russian population towards their government. Like it, or not, tens of thousands more Russian sons, husbands and fathers have to be killed in Ukraine, before the population has simply had enough or the government throwing the men into the meat grinder.

Damn you are bloodthirsty. The Ukrainians themselves aren't interested in maximizing kills. Their goal is regaining their land, and if that requires deaths, they are willing to pay the price, but overall they seem to be willing to let the actual Russian soldier leave. (Edit: excepting the ones commiting atrocities)

Keep in mind that many Ukrainians have relatives that are Russians. Some of them will be of mobilization age.

Ukrainian strategy seems to rely on destroying Russian supply lines. Destroy the ammo and fuel depots. Destroy the bridges and rail lines. See a supply convoy? Hit it. We have seen the results so far. They didn't need to kill all the Russians defending Kherson. Just make sure they won't have enough ammunition and fuel and the Russians retreat. Because a tank without fuel and ammo is just an extremely expensive hunk of steel and a soldier without bullets is just an extra mouth to feed.

What weapons can Ukraine use? The possibilities are myriad, but I believe something that can accurately strike a target as far away as 300 km away (and thus still be within the NPT) will be very useful. ATACMS is an example.

Other than that plenty of ammunition resupplies for the current equipment.

I am also watching the amount of money given to Ukraine. I understand that we tend to focus on weapon systems and grand strategies, but soldiers and civil servants have to be paid, fuel bought and distributed, homes and facilities rebuilt, refugees resettled, telecommunications restored, and so on. All this requires a lot of money.

Zelensky once said that Ukraine requires approximately $77 billion to make up for the budget shortfall. That's for about a year of this war. EU and US already promised some $30 billion, but I bet that while Ukraine would love ATACMS or F-16 or Leopard 2, Ukraine would rather have an extra $5 billion cash transferred every month.

 

[IIO2]

View attachment 49882




That's what western side believe, not Russian. I mean Russian in here not their leadership, but looking on their online sites, telegrams, save to say average Russian.

I put this picture in this thread, early in this war. This is the map of Russian inland waterways system. Russian see this as their blood line since the time of Empire. See where the waterways ended in Black Sea, it is in Sea of Azov. Which is guarded by Crimea and and the four oblasts in Southeast Ukraine. Fact is before USSR administrative division, those four oblasts is under Russia administration.

They know they have failed to change Ukraine regime, they know they have failed to get Ukraine as Neutral State. Thus they will fight for those oblasts as this is their 'minimum' aim. So I don't see they will leave this four oblasts (Luhantsk, Donentsk, Zaporozhye, and Kherson). They need much of those four oblasts to safe guard sea of azov and crimea.

At it us stand now, despite all their set backs, they are still controling much of those four oblasts. If average Russiab believe southeast Ukraine is their land, it is reside by mostly their brethen, again they will fight.

Russians can believe, all they want, that land they gifted to someone else, is suddenly theirs to take back. It's the West's job to ensure we make them pay horrendously for that aim. If Ukraine, is willing to supply the manpower to make it a miserable endeavor for the Russians, the West ought to provide every last ounce of military and economic support they can muster to try to influence a Ukrainian victory. It's the cheapest price we'll ever pay to ensure that one of our significant enemies is militarily defeated and economically hampered for a generation.

Really it comes down to 3 keys.

1). Every Western corporation must be forced by the people of its own country, to abandon Russia and cut off all access to their goods. In doing that you ensure that more Russians lose their jobs, pensions, etc, making formerly middle class people more reliable on the Government, and Russia's quickly retracting economy, for support.

2). You must keep the $300+ billion dollars in frozen Russian assets in Western control. Individual countries must continue to uncover more assets they can freeze, adding to the trove. Slowly and precisely, they assets need to be liquidated, with the proceeds used to continue funding the Ukrainians with whatever they need to keep the war miserable for Russia.

3. Europe must continue to work the The United States, Canada and the friendly nations within the Middle East, to achieve energy independence over the coming years, ensuring that Russia no longer holds such a Trump card over them at the negotiating table.

Just doing those 3 things alone will continue to force Russia's economy to suffer and contract, especially as they burn through petro money to fund this costly war, and send working aged men to their deaths, when they already have substantial national issues with internal population growth.

 

[Ananda]

Russians can believe, all they want, that land they gifted to someone else, is suddenly theirs to take back. It's the West's job to ensure we make them pay horrendously for that aim.

Well you can say what you want, it is not your blood or anyone in here to be sure blood, that will be spill. It is Ukranian and Russian blood, and none of us in here can say for sure when they should stop the fight.

So what they are believe is what matter, not what we believe.

Moderator Edit.

Very well said @Ananda