Russia/Ukraine Megathread V6

[Yotsuya]

About Kiev and such: Russian army was not in strategic positions to make a sensible invasion, but in strategic position to pressure politically. It was like a peacock spreading its tail and flashing a scary pattern. When it came apparent that Putin's bluff was called, which was unexpected, they threw together a passable invasion plan based on optimistic FSB intel and used the existing strategically weak positions (in military sense) to attack.

Here’s kind of interesting intel I have not heard mentioned often: When Russian offensive was about to start their army had so serious problem to produce enough conscripts, that many of the motorised squads were 60% undermanned. They should have a squad of 7, but many were sent across the border with only two fighters + crew. It was basically a mock army made to intimidate to begin with. (I hope I remember the details about right. This was on a lecture by Pekka Toveri.)

 

[Anewt]

About Kiev and such: Russian army was not in strategic positions to make a sensible invasion, but in strategic position to pressure politically. It was like a peacock spreading its tail and flashing a scary pattern. When it came apparent that Putin's bluff was called, which was unexpected, they threw together a passable invasion plan based on optimistic FSB intel and used the existing strategically weak positions (in military sense) to attack.

Here’s kind of interesting intel I have not heard mentioned often: When Russian offensive was about to start their army had so serious problem to produce enough conscripts, that many of the motorised squads were 60% undermanned. They should have a squad of 7, but many were sent across the border with only two fighters + crew. It was basically a mock army made to intimidate to begin with. (I hope I remember the details about right. This was on a lecture by Pekka Toveri.)

Indeed the massive column outside Kiev was all show no go. Completely undermanned and green soldiers. That's not how you invade a city by parking in a column outside for weeks...

See Mauripol for how the Russians have attacked actual goals....

 

[SandisLL]

I've always leant with the experts who believed Kiev wasn't the main goal. The east ( donbas ) and Crimea being joined ( south of Ukraine ) still to me seem like the goal. Always have. Many disagree tho. That's the glory of opinions

Why not?

With successful special operation city might be taken...

Imagine city with 3 000 000 - 3 300 000 inhabitants....or even 3 600 000 inhabitants.


If you have supporters inside and they are above average joe level + send in really experienced highly skilled provocators, $ and diversants + activate saboteurs & send in paratroopers and merchs.

For example imagine what with city might do 50 saboteurs with f.e engineering college level skills and looking like casuals + well equiped?

How demonstrations might be made? Get brainwashed locals and if needed hire local hooligans and alcoholics for cheap to add number of ppl...
In what mesh city might be turned by 50-100-300 diversants already located in city and looking like casuals?

Add paratroopers and merchs...
City might be turned into panic state in few hours....

Looks that they had failed....

 

[SandisLL]

While for me Ukraine looks very suspicous, maybe they should get sanctions.
1. They are milking us and crying. Even about food!
While they simultaneously claims about blocked food exports. Then take food and ate this, damn, it is illlgical.
2. Looks that they still maintain natural gas supplies through Ukraine to Hungary while....accuses EU that they use Gazprom natural gas.

I know that Russia is evil with intent to create new super empire from Lisbon.
We should cut ties with them...also cos they use supplies as blackmail tool, nothing new here.

While Ukraine I see is milking us like cow in dairy farm and hopes that we don't see how hypocrite and money hungry kleptocracy they are....They aren't nazis etc bullshit for sure, it is Russia's bullshit.

While I see how hypocrite, selfish and kleptocracy they are...
Country does have war, still ensures natural gas transit from aggressor to customers?

Zelenski is actor in big scene.....Damn.....

 

[Anewt]

Why not?

With successful special operation city might be taken...

Imagine city with 3 000 000 - 3 300 000 inhabitants....or even 3 600 000 inhabitants.


If you have supporters inside and they are above average joe level + send in really experienced highly skilled provocators, $ and diversants + activate saboteurs & send in paratroopers and merchs.

For example imagine what with city might do 50 saboteurs with f.e engineering college level skills and looking like casuals + well equiped?

How demonstrations might be made? Get brainwashed locals and if needed hire local hooligans and alcoholics for cheap to add number of ppl...
In what mesh city might be turned by 50-100-300 diversants already located in city and looking like casuals?

Add paratroopers and merchs...
City might be turned into panic state in few hours....

Looks that they had failed....

I just don't believe that column was ever expected to take Kiev.. if the government had fled ? Sure thing they would have taken advantage. But for me that column was there for a show of force. Not use of force.

The difference in the firepower used against the cities is why I lean this way. You don't take cities by not bombarding them constantly and not pushing into it. You definitely don't try take a city of millions with armed resistance ( and more weapons arriving daily ) by parking in a easily assaulted ( and monitored ) column with undermanned green troops who themselves are apparently low on fuel food etc etc.

Remember they were told they were on a " training mission " according to Western media.

In regards to the paratroopers... why Is it suddenly Russia and Putin care about the lives of its soldiers? Personally I would expect Russia to waste lives on fients and sacrifices without batting a eye.


They didn't even dig in to establish defensive positions. They literally sat there. Never dug in. And never attacked. Once Ukraine realised that they started pushing out from Kiev. And very quickly the Russians withdrew.

 

[b34stmode]

I wouldn't kick out a valuable partner of 70 years because of one leader.

No way should NATO consider kicking Turkey out - and they won't.

Even if you don't approve of Turkey, and there are good reasons, they are not a country we should be looking to exclude.

Turkey is doing it just to gain leverage on something they want, at the end of the day Finland will be in NATO. Erodgan while I don't like at all, is very smart.

 

[b34stmode]

A Russian soldier said he will quit the army because there is no point in fighting in Ukraine: report


"A Russian soldier told The Guardian he will quit the army because there is no point in fighting in Ukraine.

The soldier, identified only as Dmitri, is a member of a unit currently stationed in Belgorod, a Russian city close to the border with Ukraine, The Guardian reported.

He was transferred to the city after he and eight other soldiers in his battalion refused to continue fighting in Ukraine. It is unclear where exactly in Ukraine he fought.

"I have served for five years in the army. My contract ends in June," Dmitri told The Guardian. "I will serve my remaining time and then I am out of here."

"I have nothing to be ashamed of. We aren't officially in a state of war, so they could not force me to go," he added.

Dmitri also told The Guardian that he didn't want to continue fighting in Ukraine because he wanted to return to his family alive, rather than "in a casket."

"Many of us simply did not want to go back," he added."
A Russian soldier said he will quit the army because there is no point in fighting in Ukraine: report (msn.com)

Ive read many reports like this. Apparently since they aren't officially at war Russian soldiers CAN'T be punished for refusing orders to fight in Ukraine.

 

[b34stmode]

I appreciate people's experiences in the US military but I also worry that this could be used to distort the debate over Ukraine's actions an use of weapons provided by other countries. I never served in the military but feel that what Ukraine is experiences is different then conditions experienced in other wars.

Ukraine could have potentially reduced a considerable amount of destruction to their country by having applied more foreign weapons earlier. Could have also used these defensive an offensive weapons earlier.

A number of former military people claimed that Russia was going to overthrow Ukrainian government within a week. Obviously their previous experience does not automatically mean they have an inside look at how the war was going to play out.

I just wanted to point this out because this is their home they are fighting for an that's their biggest motivation.

I think the biggest factor of everyone thinking Kiev was going to fall within 72 hours is that most people actually thought Ukrainians would roll over and welcome Russians with no blood shed. They obviously severely miscalculated, and I have no idea how they got it so wrong considering you could talk to my wife for 5 minutes and realize that was never a possibility, at least for Western Ukrainians.

 

[Anewt]

I think the biggest factor of everyone thinking Kiev was going to fall within 72 hours is that most people actually thought Ukrainians would roll over and welcome Russians with no blood shed. They obviously severely miscalculated, and I have no idea how they got it so wrong considering you could talk to my wife for 5 minutes and realize that was never a possibility, at least for Western Ukrainians.

I lean to it being a narrative pushed by western media personally. It's become a massive L for Russia by most peoples perception. I never thought Kiev would fall. Nor was a goal..

But it's a great narrative to push in terms of the west making Russia look weak

 

[SandisLL]

I just don't believe that column was ever expected to take Kiev.. if the government had fled ? Sure thing they would have taken advantage. But for me that column was there for a show of force. Not use of force.

The difference in the firepower used against the cities is why I lean this way. You don't take cities by not bombarding them constantly and not pushing into it. You definitely don't try take a city of millions with armed resistance ( and more weapons arriving daily ) by parking in a easily assaulted ( and monitored ) column with undermanned green troops who themselves are apparently low on fuel food etc etc.

Remember they were told they were on a " training mission " according to Western media.

In regards to the paratroopers... why Is it suddenly Russia and Putin care about the lives of its soldiers? Personally I would expect Russia to waste lives on fients and sacrifices without batting a eye.


They didn't even dig in to establish defensive positions. They literally sat there. Never dug in. And never attacked. Once Ukraine realised that they started pushing out from Kiev. And very quickly the Russians withdrew.

Well, if for example city had large demonstrations + saboteurs and diversants worked well.
Best way to take city is from inside with help from ppl already located in city, skilled, knowledgeable and well equipped.

I if imagine what I might do if well equipped in city I do know really well.....it is terrible.
What stuff might do specially instructed and trained person for this....it is xxx above my level.

Maybe they had miscalculated something.

 

[Feniamin]

So one of the reasons Putin couldn't authorise 'full mobilisation' is just this reason - Russia have not said they are officially 'at war', so he can't.

His stupid half-measures war and posturing will be the end of him.

Unfortunately, though, his stupid half-measures war and posturing has been the end of tens of thousands of good people.

I’ve seen comments that if Russia or Ukraine officially proclaims war that means that oil/gas transportation through Ukrainian territory will stop. Will be bad for Russia and bad for Ukraine (Russia will shoot and bomb everything, seems like now they staying away from bombing pipelines). Also I think even here someone mentioned that legally Russia can’t send conscripts to fight abroad.

And also this week I’ve seen on Russian TV that there is only 15 % of Russian army currently in Ukraine.

 

[Anewt]

Well, if for example city had large demonstrations + saboteurs and diversants worked well.
Best way to take city is from inside with help from ppl already located in city, skilled, knowledgeable and well equipped.

I if imagine what I might do if well equipped in city I do know really well.....it is terrible.
What stuff might do specially instructed and trained person for this....it is xxx above my level.

Maybe they had miscalculated something.

Yeah possibly. I don't particularly lean that way tho. But ya never know

 

[b34stmode]

I lean to it being a narrative pushed by western media personally. It's become a massive L for Russia by most peoples perception. I never thought Kiev would fall. Nor was a goal..

But it's a great narrative to push in terms of the west making Russia look weak

What was the point of the feint then? Do you not believe if they did an all out blitzkrieg in the Donbass region they would have had far wider success? With the "feint" around Kiev and getting bogged down in the East, it has brought enough time for basically unlimited supplies for Ukraine to make it to the frontline. I firmly believe Kiev was an objective, and they thought it would fall with little to no bloodshed. They wanted to secure the airports in the area so they could airdrop troops and vehicles, and setup a puppet government as quick as possible. If it wasn't an objective, then they failed massively either way. I believe they would have secured the entire Donbass region within 2 weeks if they had focused their entire force on the area and did a blitzkrieg to secure it.

 

[Vergilius]

https://warontherocks.com/2022/03/putins-folly-a-case-study-of-an-inept-strategist/
Warontherocks.com is a really great website if you want to read expert analysis on this war (or on national security in general). Their writers are extremely experienced and knowledgeable - ex-military, ex-national security council and everything in between.

From this particular article:
"Vladimir Putin is a bad strategist. He does not understand the relationship between force and politics, and he is incapable of predicting international reactions to his ham-fisted military campaigns. Putin’s blunders began in 2014, with Russia’s annexation of Crimea and intervention in East Ukraine — actions that provoked widespread condemnation and suspicion about his real ambitions. With few friends left, Putin was reduced to propping up murderous authoritarian regimes in Syria and Belarus. Today, his misuse of Russian power is leading Russia towards impoverishment and isolation. His ill-considered invasion of Ukraine has galvanized international opposition, crippled the Russian economy, and overstretched the Russian military. Putin is making Russia a pariah state."

The article makes a convincing case that Putin is a bad strategist abroad, but good at consolidating his power at home. There is a lot of detail for your consideration.

 

[Anewt]

What was the point of the feint then? Do you not believe if they did an all out blitzkrieg in the Donbass region they would have had far wider success? With the "feint" around Kiev and getting bogged down in the East, it has brought enough time for basically unlimited supplies for Ukraine to make it to the frontline. I firmly believe Kiev was an objective, and they thought it would fall with little to no bloodshed. They wanted to secure the airports in the area so they could airdrop troops and vehicles, and setup a puppet government as quick as possible. If it wasn't an objective, then they failed massively either way. I believe they would have secured the entire Donbass region within 2 weeks if they had focused their entire force on the area and did a blitzkrieg to secure it.

Pushing from the east through donbas would have been a massacre for Russia. The defensive line facing East has had 7 years to prepare for a Russian invasion from the east. Your talking 200 miles plus of fortified lines ... ( trenches bunkers etc ) lines not only defensively protecting the forces there ( Ukrainian veterans ) but lines dug to slow even the armored vehicles that are designed to bridge trenches.

Blitzkrieg with armor would have failed drastically.. same with infantry as those lines are incredibly defensive and they've had 7 years to prepare for a assault from the east..

View media item 34936View media item 34935View media item 34934View media item 34933
Edit .. the goal of the Kiev fient was for Ukraine forces to be forced to defend northern and western Ukraine... whilst they focused on connecting Crimea to donbas

Edit 2 - also coming from the east would have just like the past 7 years been artilleried constantly.. Ukraine doesn't particularly care about civilian loses or infrastructure there.

So pushing from the east.. literally head on to the most defensive part of Ukraine.. occupied by some of the most veteran soldiers Ukraine has.. .. through a region Ukraine would be more than willing to go scorched earth would have been a ridiculous strategy imo

 

[Cuzcatlan]

Russia withdraw from the second largest city, Kharkiv. Russian Army is probably falling apart.

 

[PEB]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-surprise-ukraine-trip-zelenskyy-meeting

McConnell was accompanied by fellow GOP senators John Barrasso of Wyoming, Susan Collins of Maine and John Cornyn of Texas. Their offices did not immediately respond to Fox News' requests for comments.

 

[PEB]

 

[Strychnine]

The Rand family voting and lobbying consistently agains budget increases easily outdates the Putin administration. I think it started during the Brezhnev era.

Timestamped.
2:55 total and worth a watch.

"The Senator from Kentucky (Sen. Rand Paul) is now working for Vladimir Putin."

Sen. McCain (R.I.P.) tried to tell us but we didn't listen.

 

[Yotsuya]

Timestamped.
2:55 total and worth a watch.

"The Senator from Kentucky (Sen. Rand Paul) is now working for Vladimir Putin."

Sen. McCain (R.I.P.) tried to tell us but we didn't listen.

McCain saying that does not make it so. Is there some inconsistency in Rand Paul's behaviour that makes it a valid argument? What makes this case different from all the other cases in which he or his father have opposed government spending?