The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

jref

Member
There's poor accuracy vs intentional targetting. There's civilian targets repurposed for military use vs purely civilian targets. So for example Russia will definitely use heavy artillery against Ukrainian positions in urban areas. On the other hand, Ukraine has done the same for years in the Donbas (it's almost like both militaries grew out of the same Soviet ancestor :rolleyes:). The Chechen wars are a separate mess, and the first and second wars were often very different, so I don't want to mix what took place there with what we see here too much.

I'm suggesting that the overwhelming majority of Russian fires againts civilian structures are driven by information, correct or not, that Ukrainian forces are set up there. We have had a continuing pattern of Ukrainian troops hiding among civilian infrastructure intentionally, and even trying to blame Russia for damage they caused themselves (like the incident in Zhulyany where a Ukrainian SAM hit a building while launching and they tried to blame on a Russian cruise missile). We also have continuous reports out of Volnovakha and Mariupol' from local civilians stating that Ukrainian forces either damaged their home, or set up positions near their home.



I've had very poor regard for the BBC since the 5 day war where they literally reported the opposite of what was happening, and I suspect they did it either through willful ignorance or intent. I wouldn't trust them even for factual reporting, without additional corroboration.
Are there any signs of mass mobilization in Russia or mobilization efforts beyond what's needed to replace their current losses? I'm aware they're moving around a lot of different units but I don't know what to make of it.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Are there any signs of mass mobilization in Russia or mobilization efforts beyond what's needed to replace their current losses? I'm aware they're moving around a lot of different units but I don't know what to make of it.
I haven't seen any signs of mass mobilization and I suspect there won't be. I believe Russian leadership learned the lesson of not using conscripts en masse. If anything we will see attempts to recruit more service members for volunteer service and more attempts to lean on other formations like PMCs and proxy forces.
 

T.C.P

Well-Known Member
Seeing a lot of chatter and videos from pro Ukraine sources about counterattacks across Kiev. We will probably know better come sunrise the next day. If Ukraine finally trying break out of the Russian encirclement(semi encirclement)?
 

Milne Bay

Active Member

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
There is this report in today's news:

Basically it says that Ukranian forces have counterattacked in Kyiv and re-taken a strategic suburb to keep the city from being surrounded.
MB
I think it's positional back and forth in Irpen', but I'll keep an eye on it and let you know if I see something different. It would really help if they said which suburb.
 

phreeky

Active Member
I cannot find a Russian source for this (at least one hosted using a .ru domain), probably not surprising. Reports from a (now) former Russian journalist on losses of at least the early days of the war being fairly extensive, as well as opposition to the war from those serving.



Interestingly it's coming from someone this article claims is a "military correspondent" and seems to have direct military contacts.
 

Borealis

New Member

I have following this guy channel for some time. I found him talking quite logically and try to look on both sides. Off course when I put the link of this guy channel in here, there will be some members that going to say he is not independent, and he is bias on Russian position.
Good takes!
The one that stood out to me was the "Primrose Path" around the 32 minute mark.
You have to ask yourself, what was NATO's goal to allow public discussions of bringing Ukraine into their fold knowing all too well that its Russia's red line, and privately telling Ukraine they have no path into the alliance. This is either a case of extreme incompetence with all involved that are part of NATO, or willful sabotage to bring Russia into full scale war by throwing Ukraine under the bus...
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
This is either a case of extreme incompetence with all involved that are part of NATO, or willful sabotage to bring Russia into full scale war by throwing Ukraine under the bus...
Neither. Politically and optically, I think those in power would find it difficult to publicly reject Ukraine.

It would be an admission that Russia has a say in membership as opposed to a sovereign and democractic nation making an informed choice. As for redlines, the reactions in Europe after 24 Feb 2022 is pretty telling. It shows that most European policy makers never seriously entertained that possibility.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
As recent events in Kiev showed, there's nothing blind about Russian strikes. Having spent 20+ developing the recon-strike and recon-fire complexes, those are fully functioning. It remains to be seen whether this can break the Ukrainian military. I suspect Russia will be able to knock out vehicles and concentrations of troops in relatively open terrain very easily. The biggest problem will be motivated light infantry formations in urban areas, with modern weapons and comms.
The Commandant of the USMC believes that the Ukrainians have been effective at stripping out the Russian recon elements and that has impacted upon the effectiveness of their artillery and the information that is getting back to their command teams.

 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Ref your #3: Excellent point. When I try to explain this to my fellow Americans, they look at me like I have two heads.
From beginning of this invasion, I have been told by some market analyst (especially those who specializes in Russian and near Russian market) to watch what happened in South and East theater. Because that's where the Russian main goal on this stage of invasion.

I've following French Defense Ministry map for this few days. French defense official even talk in La Monde to watch East and South progress. This is different with UK and US officials that more or less avoiding talking on East and South (except Mariupol), but seems gearing the media to Kyiv area where Ukraine have more 'success' on handling the Russian force.


One thing that I see from French Map this last few days. Even tough the Russian gain seems not changing much on overall theater, however the major fight/clash in the East and South is decreasing in the area that being shown under Russian gain.

What's this means? That's I'm curious about. Where this Ukrainian eastern big army unit right now (this JFO unit)? The map shown basically Russian cut Ukrainian control territory in Luhansk and Donetsk (the clear yellow ones) in two. So where this main Ukraine Army unit is? Are they in northern yellow (which already encircle by Russian) or in southern yellow?

If they are in Southern yellow, are they holding on, or beginning retreating to Dnipro ? If most of them trap in northern yellow then it's bad news for Ukrainian Army.

That's why for me, I always looking on the news from East and South. Kyiv basically told Mariupol fighters to fight to the last man. However will they're doing the same thing to this JFO ?
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
The Commandant of the USMC believes that the Ukrainians have been effective at stripping out the Russian recon elements and that has impacted upon the effectiveness of their artillery and the information that is getting back to their command teams.

He offers one possible option and openly admits that it's one possibility. I think he is interpreting Russian recon failures as Ukrainian recon successes. I'm not sure this is correct. I think the Russian military is perfectly capable of tripping over its own feet. Note how, despite the proliferation of UAVs, we only saw consistent and effective use of Russian UAS ~2 weeks into the conflict. This doesn't sound like Ukraine stripping away the UAVs. This sounds like planning failures, with UAV units not being ready to support Russian troop movements. Did you see the columns moving with air defenses in packed mode, not actively covering the columns? To me this screams poor planning and poor execution.

The other aspect is that, as Ananda noted, the focus seems to be on Kiev. However... Russia has not concentrated the kinds of forces that can assault Kiev and arguably isn't currently preparing for an assault on Kiev. I'm much more curious about fighting around Chuguev, Balakleya, and Izyum.

At the end of the day I'm far more willing to buy Russian military incompetence then Ukrainian military competence, though this might be my bias.

What's this means? That's I'm curious about. Where this Ukrainian eastern big army unit right now (this JFO unit)? The map shown basically Russian cut Ukrainian control territory in Luhansk and Donetsk (the clear yellow ones) in two. So where this main Ukraine Army unit is? Are they in northern yellow (which already encircle by Russian) or in southern yellow?

If they are in Southern yellow, are they holding on, or beginning retreating to Dnipro ? If most of them trap in northern yellow then it's bad news for Ukrainian Army.

That's why for me, I always looking on the news from East and South. Kyiv basically told Mariupol fighters to fight to the last man. However will they're doing the same thing to this JFO ?
The northern yellow circle is probably under Russian control, just not active occupation of every small town and village. There are few large population centers there and likely few if any Ukrainian troops. The troops Ukraine had in the old front line were in several major areas. The forces directly north of Lugansk appear to have retreated towards Severodonetsk-Lisichansk area. They are semi-encircled and are holding out, instead of pulling back towards Izyum-Kramatorsk. There is a large Ukrainian force across from Donetsk-Gorlovka. Some units from these two areas are likely fighting Russia in Izyum. There were also large Ukrainian forces around Mariupol' and Volnovakha. The forces at Volnovakha were likely meant to maintain the line of communication open to the Donetsk-Gorlovka forces, but it didn't work out. The town fell and those forces are scattered. This left the Mariupol' garrison cut off, and it's not being methodically destroyed, though quite slowly and with considerable casualties.
 

phreeky

Active Member
The other aspect is that, as Ananda noted, the focus seems to be on Kiev. However... Russia has not concentrated the kinds of forces that can assault Kiev and arguably isn't currently preparing for an assault on Kiev. I'm much more curious about fighting around Chuguev, Balakleya, and Izyum.
My theory is that Putin had originally planned a Ukrainian regime change expecting this to go much more easily, hence the move on Kyiv, however has accepted that this is now not likely and so is throwing everything at objectives in the east and south as an acceptable compromise which, if successful, he can claim as a "win". That would allow him to, however poorly, justify the costs (both human and otherwise).

My concern then is that if cutting off the south of the country is seen as an absolute for Putin then he may, if he runs out of options, resort to using weapons that I don't think any of us want to see used.

The other problem here is that it depends on Ukraine accepting the above in negotiations to bring this to a close (of sorts). Otherwise, and much more likely, they'll continue the fight for the south and there is no clear end in sight.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The difference between Hitler and Putin in that analogie would be the lack of a reason for further expansionism beyond the former borders of the russian Empire.

One could argue for a full reconquista of lost soviet territory but as this would basicly mean capturing Berlin I dont think this is an realistic thought entertained by Putin.

Hitlers need for Lebensraum was born out of the theory of the shrinking markets. Putin on the other hand is driven by the idea of competition between states and governments. He thinks that great powers subjugate lesser powers by means of soft or hard power and is aware that russia without nuclear weapons is merely a smaller Power.
In order to secure the sovereignity of russia it needs to accumulate more power and grow stronger. And at the same time undermine and weaken it's enemies.

The war in Ukraine serves this purpose Well because he does keep nato forces further away from Moscow and establishes a client state which strengthen russia.

At the same time the US look incredible weak when they go and beg venezuela and iran for Oil, unwilling to put boots on the ground.

This erodes the soft power of the US, the sanctions hurting the west.

Yes, the sanction hurt russia too, but at the end the power another country has over ones economy is leverage and a way to project soft power. So by letting the West cut all ties he "cleans" his country from this danger. What ever the Economy will look like when its rebuild it will be stronger in Putins eyes. This might be actualy a parallel to Hitler who also aimed to make germany self proficient.
Do you really understand why the US and NATO refuse to put boots on the ground in the Ukraine? It's because they don't want to kick off a full blown NATO conflict with Russia. Do you understand what that would look like? WWIII and a nuclear confrontation because it's Russian doctrine to use tactical nuclear weapons in a convention war to open a gap in the front in order for them to insert an armoured force through the gap into the enemy's rear. Also if the motherland is threatened then nuclear weapons will be used.

"During the Cold War, the Soviet economy mainly supported the military. Despite, or perhaps because of, its current economic problems, Russia today continues to put a large share of its national resources into nuclear weapons programs, equating great power status with nuclear capability which may exceed that of the rest of the world combined. Indeed, in 2009, ITAR-TASS, the country’s main official news agency, stated that Russia probably had between 15,000 and 17,000 nuclear weapons. The decay of conventional forces in the decades after the dissolution of the Soviet Union made nuclear weapons more important to Russia’s leaders.
Declassified Soviet and former Warsaw Pact documents indicate that the Soviets planned to use nuclear weapons first in a general war against the West. Today, Russian military doctrine reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in a conventional war. “The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other types of weapons of mass destruction against it and (or) its allies, as well as in response to large-scale aggression utilizing conventional weapons in situations critical to the national security of the Russian Federation and its allies.” This publicly stated policy, developed by President Vladimir Putin when he was Secretary of the Russian National Security Council in 2000, likely understates Russia’s thinking on the use of nuclear weapons.
The 2010 and 2014 public versions of this doctrine read, “when the very existence of the state is under threat.” At first glance, this would appear to be a good change but, unfortunately, this is apparently not the case. In 2009, Russia announced that its policy on “the use of nuclear weapons as an instrument of strategic deterrence” would be in the “closed part” of the new military doctrine. There is no reason to classify nuclear doctrine if it is the same as the public version. Also in 2009, Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian National Security Council, indicated that in the proposed new version of the nuclear doctrine, released in February 2010: “We have corrected the conditions for use of nuclear weapons to resist aggression with conventional forces not only in large-scale wars, but also in regional or even a local one.” (Emphasis in the original.) A month later he said that Russian nuclear doctrine did “not rule out a nuclear strike targeting a potential aggressor, including a preemptive strike, in situations critical to national security.”2
In December 2009, then-Commander of the Strategic Missile Troops Lieutenant General Andrey Shvaychenko declared, “In a conventional war, [nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs)] ensure that the opponent is forced to cease hostilities, on advantageous conditions for Russia, by means of single or multiple preventive strikes against the aggressors’ most important facilities. In a nuclear war, they ensure the destruction of facilities of the opponent’s military and economic potential by means of an initial massive nuclear missile strike and subsequent multiple and single nuclear missile strikes.” General Shvaychenko’s statement is what Russia calls “de-escalation of a conflict.”
Starting in 1999, Russia began to simulate the first use of nuclear weapons in large theater war exercises. That same year, Defense Minister Marshal Igor Sergeyev stated, “Our Army was forced to launch nuclear strikes first, which enabled it to achieve a breakthrough in the theater situation.” For many years, the Russian press has reported that large strategic exercises ended in a massive nuclear strike. In an exercise conducted in 2010, Russia reportedly simulated hundreds of missile launches, and “throughout the world, the mushroom clouds rose skyward.” In March 2014, early in the Ukraine crisis, strategic missile troops conducted an exercise that reportedly involved a “massive” nuclear strike. That May, Russia held a large strategic nuclear exercise presided over by President Putin. It ended in what the Defense Ministry called a “massive” nuclear missile launch.
In February 2015, Ilya Kramnik, military correspondent for the news agency RIA Novosti, wrote that the 2010 revision of Russia’s military doctrine “further lowered” the threshold for combat use of nuclear weapons."
So if you are willing to go down that path to a global Gotterdammerung then what you suggest is a sure start. I lived through the Cold War Mk 1 and its MAD doctrine with nukes of all sizes on hair triggers. It's not particularly something that I want my children or grandchildren to have to experience.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
He offers one possible option and openly admits that it's one possibility. I think he is interpreting Russian recon failures as Ukrainian recon successes. I'm not sure this is correct. I think the Russian military is perfectly capable of tripping over its own feet. Note how, despite the proliferation of UAVs, we only saw consistent and effective use of Russian UAS ~2 weeks into the conflict. This doesn't sound like Ukraine stripping away the UAVs. This sounds like planning failures, with UAV units not being ready to support Russian troop movements. Did you see the columns moving with air defenses in packed mode, not actively covering the columns? To me this screams poor planning and poor execution.

The other aspect is that, as Ananda noted, the focus seems to be on Kiev. However... Russia has not concentrated the kinds of forces that can assault Kiev and arguably isn't currently preparing for an assault on Kiev. I'm much more curious about fighting around Chuguev, Balakleya, and Izyum.

At the end of the day I'm far more willing to buy Russian military incompetence then Ukrainian military competence, though this might be my bias.
He did say that the USMC go after the recon units and the US were in Ukraine training its military before the invasion. WRT Russian incompetence I think that it goes back to something I posted either yesterday or the day before about the apparent lack of an overall theatre commander. You have three separate forces operating in Ukraine but their seems to be little coordination between them and they appear to be doing they own thing. An overall field commander would have sorted a lot of the problems and fired any incompetent officers at flag level or below. If Putin has made himself overall commander then that's a problem because he doesn't know what he's doing and he's more of a danger to his own side than to the enemy. Back during the Great Patriotic War, Hitler was the best general that Stalin had. Churchill was another one who thought himself a reincarnation of Alexander the Great and Napoleon. However the British service chiefs did have the ability to distract him.
 

Twain

Active Member
Russian forces shelled Pavlohrad-2 station which lies on the key railway branch to Donbas. Traffic through the station has been suspended indefinitely


Doesn't look like the russians are planning any major offensives in the Luhansk area if they are shelling the railyards they would need to advance. Short range objectives for the near future at least.



People are looking at the raw numbers here, look at the casualty ratio instead: 9861 Russian KIA 16,153 Russian WIA The Russians have 37% KIA & 63% WIA, a 2 to 3 ratio. This represents an utter collapse the Russian medical evacuation & treatment system. Note, no "missing"


People are looking at the raw numbers here, look at the casualty ratio instead: 9861 Russian KIA 16,153 Russian WIA The Russians have 37% KIA & 63% WIA, a 2 to 3 ratio. This represents an utter collapse the Russian medical evacuation & treatment system. Note, no "missing"


Another possible explanation, I see no reason to believe Russian logistics for medical evacuation are maintained in any better condition than the rest of the military resulting in more deaths and less wounded.





several countries are probably doing everything they can to get this out of Ukraine and into their hands. What's the over/under for getting it across the Polish border?



Ukrainian armed forces claim that they have cut the Russian supply lines to Bucha, Irpin and Hostomel near #Kyiv - major development if confirmed (and if Ukrainian forces can hold their position)



Nut sure if this is true, there is lots of fighting west and northwest of Kyiv. If true and the ukranians can push the russians out of artillery range of Kyiv it potentially would free resources for use elsewhere in Ukraine.
 

Stuart M

Well-Known Member
Churchill was another one who thought himself a reincarnation of Alexander the Great and Napoleon. However the British service chiefs did have the ability to distract him.
Well, I like to think of him as a career frustrated Great War Lt Colonel with ambitions beyond his abilities.
Mr Putin, however, is an ex KGB agent who's perspective on warfare seems to be defined by his time in that service, how it would have operated in similar circumstances and this is further skewed by the USSRs collapse and no one wanting to say 'no' to him.
 

Twain

Active Member
All this talk of the problem of neo-Nazis in the Ukraine is hypocritical. Mr Putin's Russia is now a Fascist Regime, in nature and in action. His recent invasion of the Ukraine mimic those of Hitler almost exactly. Please read up on what constitutes Fascism. Mr Putin's Russia ticks all the boxes.
Have to agree and this latest is very disturbing. I have to read it with google translate so I am sure I am missing quite a bit but,,,,damn. It does absolutely tick all the boxes and from russian state media


"After the end of hostilities, there will be not only the former Ukraine, but also the current Russia. Our country has already changed - we just do not yet realize how deep the changes will be, because so far the process has only "started". But the post-Soviet transitional era is over: the era of ambiguity, dual faith, indistinctness and other double-mindedness.​
What was the main vulnerability of the outgoing Russia ? In its dependence on the outside world, in the mental slavery of a considerable part of our "elite"? No, it was only a derivative of the internal weakness of our way of life - transitional and temporary, but which suited very many in the "elite". Post-Soviet state capitalism carried the original sin of the thieves' privatization of state property, when the nouveau riche and temporary workers decided that from now on they are the power and masters of life here."​


If I were a russian oligarch I would be afraid, very afraid.

Moderator edit: Changed paragraph style to show quoted text.
Ngatimozart.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Update.

A map of Russian airfields being used to support operations in Ukraine.


Around Kiev.

Impacts in Kiev. Allegedly Ukrainian military storage.


Ukrainian ATGM firing near Kiev.


Satellite images of battle damage in Irpen'.


Smoke rising over Irpen'.


4 Ukrainian T-64BVs rolling through Grebenka, south of Kiev, north of Belaya Tserkov.


The North.

A Ukrainian checkpoint near Chernigov destroyed. We can see a knocked out T-72AMT, and another destroyed Ukrainian T-72 (I think), variant unclear. Allegedly a Russian artillery strike is responsible.


Belarussian troops remain highly active near the border. It's probably a just in case readiness rather then invasion preparations.


Kharkov-Sumy.

Russian Malkas and Smerch firing at targets near Kharkov.


Alleged Russian intercept of two Ukrainian Tochka missiles over Russian territory near Belgorod.


Cruise missile headed towards Kharkov.


Explosions near Kharkov.


Ukrainian territorial defense near Sumy heading out to ambush a Russian fuel truck column.


Russian troop column moving in Kharkov area towards Izyum.


Zaporozhye-Dnepropetrovsk-Krivoy Rog.

Missile strike hit Krivoy Rog.


Civilian taped to a pole and beaten, Krivoy Rog. Context unclear.


Person taping in Berdyansk comments that life is back to normal in Berdyansk, but there are some limitations on food supplies and humanitarian aid is being delivered.


Kherson-Nikolaev-Odessa.

Unconfirmed reports that Russian frigate Admiral Makarov fired on Ukrainian combat divers Nichaev, while it was placing sea mines, using a Shtil-1 SAM. The Ukrainian ship was grounded.

Телеграм канал Battle Sailor сообщает:.. | Военный Осведомитель | VK

Footage out of Kherson. Russian troops patrol the city, but otherwise things appear to almost be back to normal (save the regular though so far relatively small anti-Russian protests).


Protests in Kherson scattered by Russian National Guard using tear gas.


Allegedly a leaked Ukrainian document out of Odessa that instructs forces to use schools as basing locations, and to prevent civilians from leaving the city.


Reportedly a forest fire near Kherson, if true likely caused by the fighting.


LDNR Front.

The Pavlograd-2 rail junction got hit. It was allegedly a supply point for Ukrainian forces.


Reports of Russian missiles striking Kramatorsk, including the airport. Ukrainian forces were basing there.


Ukrainian air defense firing over Kramatorsk.


A supermarket storage facility is burning in Severodonetsk. Allegedly it was being used as a Ukrainian military storage facility.


Battle damage in Slavyansk.


Captured BRDM-2 in DNR hands.


Russian Mi-24s and Su-25s over the Donbas.


DNR forces near Mar'inka.


Rebel fighter carrying a LAW rocket launcher.


Rebel forces captured a Spanish C90-CR.


DNR forces captured munitions and equipment.


Mariupol'.

Russian UAVs operating over Mariupol'.


Combat in Mariupol'. Commentary says that this is a position on the 8th floor of what is clearly a residential building.


Two videos out of Mariupol', one of a POW from the Ukrainian National Guard who was hiding in plain clothes. He confirms their positions were inside residential high rises. The other of rebel forces finding spent RPG tubes in apartments.


Reports from Mariupol' of a Russian Raptor patrol boat getting hit. It either sank or didn't (conflicting claims) and Russia claims 2 WIA.


Allegedly two Russian warships provided fire support for troops advancing through Mariupol'.


Battle damage, Mariupol' airport.


A captured Ukrainian BTR-80 being used by rebel forces near Mariupol'.


Old combat footage out of Mariupol', Ukrainian T-64B1Ms firing.


Misc.

Ukrainian artillery battery getting hit by what looks like Russian MLRS. The footage and landscape makes me suspect somewhere near Kiev.


Ukrainian Giatsint-B battery firing, location unclear. I wonder if it's the same unit as above.


More footage of Russian UAVs correcting artillery fire. One of the videos appears to be the same as above.


Russian Ka-52 avoiding what they claim is a Stinger. It really could be any MANPADS.


Destroyed Ukrainian Su-25, context and location unclear.


Russian warships launching Kalibrs, targets unclear.


Nona-K firing, probably in rebel hands, location unknown.


Ukrainian soldiers practicing with a Soviet Maxim gun.


Ukrainian forces basing in allegedly a school. Location and context unclear.


More pole taping and corporal punishment of civilians, location and context unclear. Probably looter/thief.

 

Soldier25

New Member
A colossal explosion, a powerful rocket attack on the Retroville shopping center in Kiev. The missile strike was carried out after Russian intelligence received evidence that Ukraine was harboring Grad multiple launch rocket systems and other equipment at civilian facilities. In the video, a Ukrainian rocket launcher fires a salvo at Russian troops, after which it leaves for a shopping center

 
Top