Russo-Ukrainian War 2014-25

[Tonitrus]

That particular telegram channel it originated from has cried wolf about Putin dying about 17 times in the last year. I wouldn't get my hopes up.

And the source also apparently claimed that all recent appearances and foreign trips were done by doubles.  I'd put this on the "gonna need to see a body" level of a required proof.

[jimmy olsen]

It seems that the Russians may have finally took that artificial mountain, it only cost them what, 5,000 men and 200 vehicles?

Not sure the math works out in Russia's favor there.

[Savonarola]

Ukraine war: Russia executing own retreating soldiers, US says



TRADITION!

[Josquius]

It seems that the Russians may have finally took that artificial mountain, it only cost them what, 5,000 men and 200 vehicles?

Not sure the math works out in Russia's favor there.

It doesn't. But there's more to Avdivka than attritional war. It's all about perception and PR, battling to defeat the major threat to Russia - international aid for Ukraine.

WHY AVDIVKA MATTERS

The Russian Avdivka offensive of course has been talk of the town. Their losses have been horrendous. And they don't care.
I delivered my 'that made them all go quiet' moment, when I explained what a Russian success would mean.
This is of course theoretical but let's say Russia breaks the Ukrainian defences and encircle the city resulting in its capture by spring next year.
First off it would be a military set back like few others for Ukraine. From a morale perspective it would be devastating. From a PR standpoint a disaster. It would feed every argument that the war can't be won and the Ukrainians would have to negotiate.
It would make the offensive that carved out the Robotyne salient this year look like the disappointing result it really is and show it up as being almost derisory. It would call into question everything western aid has been used for. Worse than that it would demonstrate that even in the depths of misery and depravity, the Russian military system worked. Utter ruthlessness and even incompetence prevailed because they were prepared to sacrifice life on a scale not seen since WW2. Putin would be seen as victorious and negotiate from a position of strength.
That's why this city matters this time - far more than Bakhmut ever did. Avdivka had been a bastion of Ukrainian defence since 2014. Losing it would mean everything east and south under occupation is almost certainly lost for good.
That's why it cannot be allowed to happen. It isn't its physical loss that matters - it's the moral, morale, perception and political reality it forces to the fore. It would be a watershed moment.
So this is why Putin has shrewdly picked it. Not winning it changes little for Russia. Ukraine losing it, changes everything for Ukraine.
That is what's at risk here. This battle will I think run in sequences of Russian attacks, gaps and new attacks. They have made up their mind. This is what matters. So far this year they made up their mind to take Bakhmut and they did, to stop the offensive in the south and they did. And now they want Avdivka. They're prepared to sacrifice everything to do it.
Think about where we are. Strategically Putin has outplayed Ukraine.
They struck - wrongly in my opinion right where everyone and their mother's hairdresser knew where they would strike - in the south. It got nowhere really, used up a mass of resources and stopped. Klishievka was far more promising and may yet save the day.
We all thought Putins forces were spent. Yet they stopped the advance and even when they seemed to be at their last breath, the whole time over the summer they were massing for this attack, in secret in Donetsk and deep behind the lines. Dispersed and unrecognised they were quietly brought up and extraordinary losses have been seen of kit we estimated they'd run out of.
You have to credit the Russians with one thing - I've warned of it before - they always take an age to get going and they screw a great deal up getting there, but somehow they have a habit that if you give them the time, they figure it out.
Many of you will know I am playing the role of the Devils Advocate here. I need you to see what the other reality can be.
I need you to understand that Russia isn't done. The war is nowhere near over. If they are victorious at Avdivka the game will change drastically.
It will be the news of the winter and it's all we will hear from that front unless it's stopped. Ukraine has to find a way to stop it and we have to make sure they have the means to do so. Regardless of the cost.  The enemy is ruthless and wants it. They have a track record in the last year of winning even when they seem to have lost. The real danger is our bias is such that we have failed to see the depth of the determination and threat.  It isn't over.

Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦!

[Crazy_Ivan80]

The dithering of the west is a big factor to this. Our support really needs to be much more forceful.

[Jacob]

The dithering of the west is a big factor to this. Our support really needs to be much more forceful.

Yeah, I'd like us to be more all-in with support that's for sure.

[Josquius]

Things don't look good.
From a pretty reliable telegram channel of a British analyst.

MILITARY & STRATEGIC:
ASSESSING THE WAR THIS YEAR: WHO'S WINNING?

Firstly forget your bias. If you're reading this other than a couple trolls, you support Ukraine.
I support Ukraine. I want Ukraine to win.
However we have to face some irritating facts.
Firstly I want you to remember Russia has two huge advantages.
Manpower - it's not inexhaustible but it has more than enough in a dictatorship to supply this war for years to come. The quality of that manpower may be minimal but it has it nonetheless.
Strategic geographical depth - Russia is vast, Ukraine is never likely to be able to reach far enough or deeply enough to destroy the industries that support the war, or do enough damage to make the entire nation feel the pain.
On the other hand Ukraine has manpower it refuses to use yet could significantly alter the situation on the frontlines. I've discussed this unwillingness to draft enough men and women before and Ukraine shows no sign of doing anything about it even though it's a key part of winning the war. The army is basically older men in their late thirties and forties.
We have to face the reality of the southern offensive. It failed. Russia won. It didn't win by some military genius, it didn't win by any new weapon, although the FPV drones helped. It won by sacrificing men and material in a relentless offence to defend tactic that, combined with mines used in unprecedented numbers and trench defences, made speed and agility impossible to utilise because Ukraine just didn't have the aircraft to make a breakthrough possible. They were tasked with a combined arms job without the most important tools to make it possible. They did their best and it just wasn't enough without air support.
I have said this all year long: it was a mistake to attack in the south. You don't do what the enemy expects. Everyone and their mother knew where these attacks would come. Yet the one place a breakthrough could have been accelerated and decisive - Klieshievka and the southern Bakhmut front, was left to wither and die on the altar of the never happened breakthrough in the south.
Over and over again Russian weakness in front of Klieshievka was noted repeatedly- even at its most aggressive point its was nothing compared to the southern front. One or two brigades rapidly transferred here to exploit this weakness could have made a decisive difference.
In the north the Russians played the distraction game but it achieved little although it has created long term logistics issues for Ukraine crossing the Oskil river.
Bakhmut early this year was a successful operation in terms of defending and withdrawing while inflicting maximum damage on Russian forces - but the Russians still won in the end. They got what they wanted and Ukraine is nowhere near getting it back. Russia suffered hideous losses and created terrible destruction but they achieved their objective.
It doesn't matter how they achieved it in the end. You have to look at this from a corporate balance sheet point of view - it only matters what happens now and in the future - past costs and expenses can't be changed and are written off. What it cost doesn't matter to them, the bottom line is they won.
They won in the south because they had one objective: prevent a Ukrainian breakthrough, and they did.
Now they have also won the war of assumptions.
We have all assumed - that includes the US and NATO, that Russia has been loosing so much equipment and so many men, burnt through so much ammunition, lost so many commanders for any number of reasons, that an offensive was beyond it.
Yet the whole of the summer while Klieshievka and Robotyne fronts were supposedly on the point of collapse and Ukraine was on the point of probably breaking through, what were they doing? They were stockpiling in secret several brigades worth of equipment and sufficient ammunition to start a huge offensive against
Avdivka. That's how utterly ruthless they are.  CONTINUED...

CONTINUED:
They sacrificed men of experience and training and loyalty and reputation - elite forces of the VDV - for another objective, even when they could have reinforced that front with more equipment.
HIMARS has sent Russian logistics and supply chains into a new reality and they have largely adapted to it. ATACMS is more of a problem for larger transport nodes and certainly for the airfields and helicopter bases. However helicopters don't need fixed basing in the field and Russia will adapt eventually even though few are left. Forcing aviation out of Crimea along with the Russian navy, is a big strategic success and has allowed the continued export of grain and trade despite every effort to stop it.
But all of these successes haven't substantially changed the front line in any way all year. It's basically a stalemate. Russia has defended in its own way, and Ukraine in theirs. Ukraine's offensive in the south failed to reach any goals.
It is right now a strategic stalemate. Avdivka may become a problem and Ukraines biggest is that it's now stuck its head in the potential noose of Robotyne and that too small to defend easily salient. It's also now facing Avdivka under severe pressures. Its forces are exhausted after a hard summer campaign and ammo is tight. Political support form the US in terms of new aid is essential.
Despite the drama of missile strikes and outstanding heroism, high morale and right being on their side, it's not Ukraine who compromises its victory.
It's still The West. Dithering over missiles, dithering over aircraft, dithering over cluster munitions that turned out to be vital. Dithering over tanks and a dozen other minor weapons.
Underestimating Ukraine and its people have all contributed. That there is some kind of 'stupidity factor' seems to have run through western training courses- only to find they can teach us things we know nothing about. They can tell us how to operate combat drones and the problems they deal with, how to fly ground attack missions in full frontal combat - when there's hardly a western pilot anywhere that's flown anything like it against a modern Russian army. We know nothing about trench operations and mobile counter battery artillery operations that they practice every day. Yet still there's this perception they're not 'us' and we know better. This past week I have tried to hammer home the fact of our western complacency, that we have the best and know how to use it is only partially true. Our equipment is often better - but we just as often don't know how to use it in the war they are fighting. Stop trying to tell them or influence them in how to use it.
Ukraine has its own internal problems. Some old school military have been responsible for some tragedies. That's mostly been dealt with now.
There is still this reluctance to fully engage the entire population in Total War. Because that's what they need to do. This is existential and everyone needs to get on board. Yet it hasn't done so. If it is to beat Russia and remove it from its lands it will have to. The only other way out is by negotiating. And as long as Putin is alive he won't give up anything meaningful.
If the war isn't decisively won in 2024 then it's over. If Ukraine doesn't commit itself 110% to winning - and it hasn't yet, if the West doesn't give what it must of itself - far more than it plans right now, this time next year it will be almost exactly where it is at this moment. And that's what the Russians will be happy with. Because that means they can't be moved and that means in the end, they've won.
Do we want that? I don't think so. I know you don't either.

Slava Ukraine ! 🇺🇦

No more posts today.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Things don't look good.
From a pretty reliable telegram channel of a British analyst.

MILITARY & STRATEGIC:
If the war isn't decisively won in 2024 then it's over. If Ukraine doesn't commit itself 110% to winning - and it hasn't yet, if the West doesn't give what it must of itself - far more than it plans right now, this time next year it will be almost exactly where it is at this moment. And that's what the Russians will be happy with. Because that means they can't be moved and that means in the end, they've won.
Do we want that? I don't think so. I know you don't either.
 

Since I don't see our politicians growing a sufficient amount of balls to do what is needed here, I guess the autocracies will command the next century.

[jimmy olsen]

Eh... we know how much material they're losing per month and how much they are building. They are effectively going to run out of armored vehicles and artillery by next summer at this rate. How are they going to continue their offensives at that point?

[The Minsky Moment]

Eh... we know how much material they're losing per month and how much they are building. They are effectively going to run out of armored vehicles and artillery by next summer at this rate. How are they going to continue their offensives at that point?

Xi.  So far that line hasn't been crossed, but a lot could happen in a year.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Eh... we know how much material they're losing per month and how much they are building. They are effectively going to run out of armored vehicles and artillery by next summer at this rate. How are they going to continue their offensives at that point?

if the allies are not able to dislodge the Russians that counts as a victory for Russia.
Imagine if the Allies hadn't been able to roll back the Germans on the Western front in 14-18? How would that not have been some kind of victory for the Central Powers.
I'm aware the WW1 took a bit longer than the current phase in the Ukrainian war has been going on, but the Allies then were made of sterner stuff than our politicians today.

[Josquius]

On the armaments front apparently Russia has shot itself in the foot this year too- early in the year its factories were hitting record not seen since the cold war output...but because armaments factory workers are all properly registered in numerous government databases they're an easy target for drafting to by frontline infantry. Amazing.

Though yes. The problem is indeed other nations giving stuff to Russia. Less Xi but North Korea undoubtedly has an insane amount of stockpiled cold war era shit and we know for a fact they are supplying Russia- after the collapse of the eastern block ungodly amounts were uncovered in its less-extreme European equivalent, Albania.

Xi does hold the balance in his hands however. He has the potential to hand a final victory to the Russians. I suspect Chinese aid staying hush-hush serves China well on both fronts of keeping the west and Russia happy, and weakening Russia and the west with a prolonged war.

[jimmy olsen]

Eh... we know how much material they're losing per month and how much they are building. They are effectively going to run out of armored vehicles and artillery by next summer at this rate. How are they going to continue their offensives at that point?

if the allies are not able to dislodge the Russians that counts as a victory for Russia.

How are they going to hold them back if they don't have enough artillery or armored reserves? Mine fields won't stymie the Ukrainians forever.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Eh... we know how much material they're losing per month and how much they are building. They are effectively going to run out of armored vehicles and artillery by next summer at this rate. How are they going to continue their offensives at that point?

if the allies are not able to dislodge the Russians that counts as a victory for Russia.

How are they going to hold them back if they don't have enough artillery or armored reserves? Mine fields won't stymie the Ukrainians forever.

Perun's video from a few weeks back dealt with Russian ability to replenish their equipment. They have sufficient capacity to hold the line if the west bows out.
Additionally, if the western aid dries up our enemies may be emboldened to send more aid to Russia, overtly.

[Tamas]

I am not buying the standstill is a Russian win thesis. Sure it's not a Ukrainian win either, but, cynically perhaps, a standstill is a Western world order win - an attempt of military conquest that turns into an endless quagmire and insane resource hog ruining the aggressor is an infinitely more desired outcome than a military conquest achieving its objective in terms of world stability.