The Russian-Ukrainian War Thread

Capt. Ironpants

Active Member
Maybe there was no intent to destroy Wagner and the strikes, very limited, by single aircraft, were meant to halt not destroy the convoy? Maybe there was knowledge that this wasn't a coup but something else? I don't know but it's not clear what exactly was going on. Most of what Wagner AA shot down weren't strike jets or attack helos. It doesn't look like Russian leadership wanted Wagner destroyed.
Some Asian sources which are usually fairly reliable (but hardly infallible) say that at least some of the aircraft shot down by Wagners were actually en route to eastern/southern Ukraine per original orders, and the Wagners wrongly assumed they had been tasked with striking their column and shot them down. I'm sorry I can't go back and find those assertions now and provide links, but I offer this as only a possible explanation if any truth to it at all. As things stand at the moment, all we have are possible explanations for confusing events, given our lack of hard knowledge of what really went on. You and some others here are better able to assess whether this might be a plausible possible explanation than I.

I have also seen assertions that at least one or two were striking the road just ahead of the advancing Wagner columns to hinder their progress, claiming this was a tried-and-true tactic used effectively by Russia in Syria. I confess I have not followed Syria closely enough to judge. It's just another possibility in my mind, given my lack of knowledge. Another question mark among many.

My own background, education and real-life experience have taught me that one truly must have a "high tolerance for ambiguity" if one is to go poking about in Other People's conflicts (and remain somewhat sane at least), or even trying to understand them from afar. This one really puts that to the test! And here I am "afar" this time.
 

koxinga

Well-Known Member
Wagner is pulling in a lot of money in Central African Republic and other countries which they are propping up in order to get access to their natural resources such as oil and diamonds. I dont know who apart from Prigozhin is sharing in this wealth but I am sure that there are many powerful people who dont want to cut him off completely
Wagner is not Prigozhin alone. At the very least there is still Dmitry Utkin.
Powerful people like obedient dogs and they never put themselves into a situation there they are beholden by one very loud, and out of control dog.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
2. Putin says the uprising was "doomed to fail" and that "its organizers, even though they lost their sense of right and wrong, couldn't have failed to realize that." But then, Putin also admitted that Russian airmen were killed by Prigozhin during his blackmail/mutiny, but that both them and the mutineer Wagnerites were heroes in the end — I can’t make sense of it, except to laugh at him. Putin said almost nothing, speaking for just 5 minutes. And nothing newsworthy.
The part of the tweet above that says

He also seems say Ukraine was involved somehow and calls the revolt "revenge for their failed counteroffensive"

is wrong, not sure intentionally or not. The idea behind his words was that the “enemies in Kiev as well as their Western curators” wanted to see Russians killing each other, sea of blood, etc. He did not imply that Ukraine or/and the West are somehow behind it. Sort of they were cheering on for the worst to happen - Russian soldiers killing each other, as well as civilians, Russia falling apart - especially in view of “their failed so-called counteroffensive, but they miscalculated”. The idea is that they hoped they would recover their losses that way. I hope that makes it clear. I have not read the rest of the tweet, so not sure if there are other inconsistencies.

In regards to heroes, he only called the perished pilots heroes “that saved Russia from tragic and destructive (or devastating?) consequences”. He didn’t call the mercenaries heroes. In particular, he said that “At the same time, we knew and know that the absolute majority of commanders and fighters of the Wagner group are also Russian patriots, who are also loyal to their people and country. They proved it with their bravery on the battlefield, while liberating Donbas and Novorossiya. They (the organizers) tried to use them in the dark against their own brothers in arms with whom they were fighting together for their country and its future.” He said that they were used by the organizers and, hence, were also betrayed by them. He thanked “those fighters and commanders of the Wagner group that made the decision, the only correct decision, and chose to stop at the last line over fratricide. Today they have an opportunity to continue serving Russia by signing a contract with the Ministry of Defense or other Agencies.” Or they can return to their families. “Those who want, may leave to Belarus. The promise I have given will be fulfilled. I will repeat, the choice is yours, but I am confident it will be the choice of Russian fighters that recognized their tragic mistake”. He then proceeded to thank Lukashenko very briefly (like really briefly) and repeated that most important was patriotism of citizens and consolidation of the entire Russian society, which played the decisive role.

As you can see, these little things make quite a bit of difference. I see many of these type of “misinterpretations” that make for a whole new meaning that wasn’t there and was never intended.


As a side note, another thought In regards to those leaving to Belarus. Let’s say thousands of them will. Are they just going to sit there in their compounds “training” and getting paid? Paid by who? And for what?
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
As a side note, another thought In regards to those leaving to Belarus. Let’s say thousands of them will. Are they just going to sit there in their compounds “training” and getting paid? Paid by who? And for what?
The logical part would be the ones who go to Belarus keep operating in the far abroad, Syria, Africa, etc. The ones who stay convert to MoD units.
 

KipPotapych

Well-Known Member
^ Assuming a good chunk will leave for Belarus (is that realistic?), is there such a demand for Wagner troops in places abroad? My understanding is that it is quite a group now compared to what it was a year ago.

Also, do they seize representing Russian interests abroad now? Will Russian government be willing to deal with them after the events of last week? Not that there are currently many alternatives.

Would be nice to see something like a recap of everything what has taken places, Prigozhin’s statements, etc.
 

rsemmes

Member
"How committed are you to this war?"
How committed is any soldier to war? As far as I know they are committed to those sharing their trench.

Now, one question...
Ukraine has combat divers, it has water drones and other special equipment. Are we going to be able to differentiate between 100kg of explosive inside a dam or against the inner wall of a dam?
Crossing a river is difficult, crossing a river under the threat of a dam blowing up upriver would be stupid. So, apart from the propaganda stunt, eliminating that threat helps what side exactly?
 

vikingatespam

Well-Known Member
"How committed are you to this war?"
How committed is any soldier to war? As far as I know they are committed to those sharing their trench.

Now, one question...
Ukraine has combat divers, it has water drones and other special equipment. Are we going to be able to differentiate between 100kg of explosive inside a dam or against the inner wall of a dam?
Crossing a river is difficult, crossing a river under the threat of a dam blowing up upriver would be stupid. So, apart from the propaganda stunt, eliminating that threat helps what side exactly?
A number of engineers have claimed that the explosives would have to be internally placed in order to cause the degree of catastrophic failure at the dam, which was designed for much larger impulses than what frog-men could place. We also have several seismic records of a large explosion at the damn - again, something you would be unlikely to place via divers.

Russian benefits the most here. They eliminate the possibility of a crossing at the dam, which was the most likely place, and you make large scale crossing below the dam very difficult due to newly formed mud flats. Russia then can move units stationed in the area to other areas where the UKR are attacking.

Russian had firm control of the damn, and we have photo evidence of some explosive demolition work on top of the dam at the time.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
"How committed are you to this war?"
How committed is any soldier to war? As far as I know they are committed to those sharing their trench.

Now, one question...
Ukraine has combat divers, it has water drones and other special equipment. Are we going to be able to differentiate between 100kg of explosive inside a dam or against the inner wall of a dam?
Crossing a river is difficult, crossing a river under the threat of a dam blowing up upriver would be stupid. So, apart from the propaganda stunt, eliminating that threat helps what side exactly?
!00 kg of explosive isn't going to do that much damage. If you look at the RAF strike against the German dams in the Ruhr during WW2 (OP CHASTISE), each of Barnes Wallace's bouncing bombs was filled with 2,990 kg (6,600 lb) of torpex. One bomb alone wasn't able to breach any of the Ruhr dams dam requiring multiple hits. Each bomb that hit the target was hard against the dam wall when it exploded.
 

rsemmes

Member
Vietnam/Israel.
EW aircraft, decoys, air missions and fake air missions from North, East and South, launching missiles from land and sea... The Soviet Union was facing that kind of operations, that is what they studied, I am going to guess that that was the kind of operations they trained for. Why eight bridges across the Dnieper hasn't been blown up? The mantra of Russian incompetence doesn't help.
Obviously, I haven't been in any "STAVKA" meeting, I don't know under what guidelines they are acting, but it is surprising how shy they are. Israel tried to destroy the crossings in 1973, it suffered losses, it is going to happen; still, I cannot understand that (up to a level) inaction.
 

rsemmes

Member
A number of engineers have claimed that the explosives would have to be internally placed in order to cause the degree of catastrophic failure at the dam, which was designed for much larger impulses than what frog-men could place. We also have several seismic records of a large explosion at the damn - again, something you would be unlikely to place via divers.
Russian benefits the most here. They eliminate the possibility of a crossing at the dam, which was the most likely place, and you make large scale crossing below the dam very difficult due to newly formed mud flats. Russia then can move units stationed in the area to other areas where the UKR are attacking.
Russian had firm control of the damn, and we have photo evidence of some explosive demolition work on top of the dam at the time.
"Unlikely". All right, I'm no in the RE, even if I think I read something about hollow charges against concrete bunkers.
Crossing at or below the dam when it can blow up eliminates that possibility, correct?
 

swerve

Super Moderator
!00 kg of explosive isn't going to do that much damage. If you look at the RAF strike against the German dams in the Ruhr during WW2 (OP CHASTISE), each of Barnes Wallace's bouncing bombs was filled with 2,990 kg (6,600 lb) of torpex. One bomb alone wasn't able to breach any of the Ruhr dams dam requiring multiple hits. Each bomb that hit the target was hard against the dam wall when it exploded.
Hard against the wall & damped by water, so more effective than if it was in the open air.

A shaped charge or something like the Storm Shadow BROACH warhead (a shaped charge precursor warhead followed by a penetrating warhead which will explode inside the object being attacked) is more effective, kg for kg, at making holes in things than a simple charge such as the bouncing bombs, but given the huge difference in weight of explosive & the damping of the bouncing bombs, I'd expect each one to do significantly more damage to a dam wall than a Storm Shadow would.
 

rsemmes

Member
I'm not sure how a now wider river, mud flats and floating mines is supposed to help Ukraine?
It gives Ukraine a bad possibility, a dam over their heads gives them no possibility. I don't mean an offensive, just a diversionary attack, something bigger than an incursion.
 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Whoever knows the language, is this Chinese or Korean? These are 152mm shells in Russian service. Either way this is our first confirmation of deliveries from either one.


EDIT: Given that the charge is Iranian, some commentators are suggesting that these are Chinese shells that were supplied to Iran and are now making their way to Russia. This would make sense to me.

EDIT2: MoscowCalling thinks they're from Syria, again Chinese re-export.

 
Last edited:

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
Much was discussed around who benefits from the dam being blown. We might have the answer. It appears Ukraine benefits. There is now a Ukrainian foothold near the Antonov bridge, and according to Rybar Ukrainian S-300s have been forward deployed, and EW is apparently interfering with Russian loitering munitions being used in the area. Pontoon units have also reportedly been spotted. It appears to be preparation for a cross-river push. It remains to be seen how this plays out, but if this is accurate, it means the destruction of the dam did nothing to prevent Ukraine from attempting this. It's also important to note that with the dam intact and under Russian control, Russia could release water from the Kahovskiy reservoir to wash away Ukrainian pontoon bridges downstream.

 

swerve

Super Moderator
Whoever knows the language, is this Chinese or Korean? These are 152mm shells in Russian service. Either way this is our first confirmation of deliveries from either one.


EDIT: Given that the charge is Iranian, some commentators are suggesting that these are Chinese shells that were supplied to Iran and are now making their way to Russia. This would make sense to me.

EDIT2: MoscowCalling thinks they're from Syria, again Chinese re-export.

I don't know either language, but I can instantly recognise the scripts. Those are Chinese characters. AFAIK N. Korea uses only Hangul, a Korean phonetic script that looks like this - 이것은 한글입니다.
Chinese - 这是中文脚本
 

Larry_L

Active Member
Much was discussed around who benefits from the dam being blown. We might have the answer. It appears Ukraine benefits. There is now a Ukrainian foothold near the Antonov bridge, and according to Rybar Ukrainian S-300s have been forward deployed, and EW is apparently interfering with Russian loitering munitions being used in the area. Pontoon units have also reportedly been spotted. It appears to be preparation for a cross-river push. It remains to be seen how this plays out, but if this is accurate, it means the destruction of the dam did nothing to prevent Ukraine from attempting this. It's also important to note that with the dam intact and under Russian control, Russia could release water from the Kahovskiy reservoir to wash away Ukrainian pontoon bridges downstream.

That covers motive. Means and opportunity are still quite difficult for Ukraine. I have yet to come up with an idea how Ukraine could have accomplished this. In my mind, I see them less likely to cause the civilian destruction, and casualties. There is also a roadbed that has reapeared upriver from the dam, although that is less likely to be of use. I do question the image evidence of the car with explosives that was seen on top of the dam.
 

Larry_L

Active Member
There is a report on topwar that Putin is hinting at changes in the top levels of the MOD in a discussion with service members. I doubt if Shoigu or Gerasimov will be replaced soon. This may be a bone thrown to those in the ranks who agreed with Wagner about the rot at the top.

Quote: "The President of Russia today made a statement that attracts special attention. It concerned the one who, according to President Vladimir Putin, should become the backbone of the command of the Russian Armed Forces. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief shared his thoughts today during a meeting with servicemen.

According to the head of state, the backbone of the leadership of the RF Armed Forces in the future should be formed from those who duly proved themselves in combat work, including aviation component. "

 

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
That covers motive. Means and opportunity are still quite difficult for Ukraine. I have yet to come up with an idea how Ukraine could have accomplished this. In my mind, I see them less likely to cause the civilian destruction, and casualties. There is also a roadbed that has reapeared upriver from the dam, although that is less likely to be of use. I do question the image evidence of the car with explosives that was seen on top of the dam.
I want to be clear. At this point in the discussion I'm not interested in who blew the dam. Both side have too much of a motive to lie and I'm not enough of an expert to tell it apart. I'm suspending judgement on that until the war is over and we have impartial third party investigations. I'm interested in; now that the dam is blown, who benefits and what does this mean for the war? It appears that it means Ukraine will attempt to attack across the Dnepr.
 
Top