RebelE Infantry said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

From a strategic standpoint, they've prioritized the development of better missile and naval technology.

---

Haven't seen where their naval technology has been that helpful, despite Ukraine being a state that borders the Black Sea. If they could launch cruise missiles that are guided into Kiev, why are they not doing that?

Why haven't they made a serious attempt to take Odessa?

Went down a short rabbit hole today about the Russian sub, The Kursk, from back in 2000, when Putin was first in office. He was at his dacha on the Black Sea when it went down after explosions. His Navy lied to him that rescue was imminent so he did not return to Moscow for several days. He was trashed over that and learned the political mistake. He apparently did not learn the "military will lie to him" lesson.

---

It appears that Odessa is very well defended, and the adverse weather has prevented an amphibious landing so far. It could be that they are happy to tie down the Ukrainian forces there and keep them from reinforcing other areas of the front.

---

The sinking of the Vitaly Bykov was a strong warning against an amphibious landing because it was done with a low tech, plentiful, unguided GRAD MLRS. If they can simply ripple surface rockets against any ship that comes inside the threat ring as it approaches the coast around Odesa then itmeans that those concealed shore battery launchers need to be neutralized as an enabling condition for the landing. Any embarked landing forces that saw the Bykov get lit up will mutiny if they think their ship is going to get the same treatment.

fburgtx said:

---

https://news.yahoo.com/kremlin-says-russian-military-action-115703035.html

From Reuters.

This is what Russia SAYS it wants. I don't know if it's true or not, but IF true, seems like they should get to negotiating. Those two "breakaway" republics have apparently wanted to join Russia for some time. Crimea was already gone. Neutrality?? If that means "no NATO membership", well, fair or not, it could be seen why Russia wouldn't want Ukraine to join.

Again, who knows if Russia is being honest??

---

No clue. We don't have a precedent to compare it to if they are.

Add to that the Russians may not have secure and reliable coms. If they end up without that and little to no air cover and there are tens of thousands of guns and thousands of trained troops, they won't have a chance.
They will call on all the direct artillery and missiles they can get. That would be about it.

A very young looking retired General!

MeatDr said:

---

Red Pear Realty said:

---

And this map shows that there easily could have been that many helicopters there to have been destroyed. Also this was one of the very first airfields seized by the Russians. Good for the Ukes.

Kherson airfield is a large helicopter landing site even before the current war. Within a possibility that the news are true. pic.twitter.com/qWS89m78v0

— Torbjörn Hederoxe af Djupsjöbacka (@hederoxe) March 7, 2022

---

---

Did this ever get confirmed or disproven?

Any chance the Ukrainians could start on the offense and bomb Moscow? How long can you play defense?

I have seen what running a prevent defense with a big lead in 4th quarter can do for you. Seems to alway come back and bite you in ass.

buzzardb267 said:

---

This may have already been discussed, but I heard a retired USMC Major, that taught marines urban warfare, say while the usual force multiplier is 3:1, in urban warfare it is at least 5:1. Now i realize that is trained military against trained military, but it points out what the ruskies might be up against if they move on Kiev. I was only an engineer in Vietnam, so have no informed opinion on that, just relaying info out there.

---

Urban warfare is nasty and certainly favors the entrenched when limited to lite weapons only. I suspect putin may originally wanted kyiv intact he wont hesitate to plan B which is leveling the city. Tanks and artillery dont have to enter to rain death.

Aggie Hunter said:

---

Any chance the Ukrainians could start on the offense and bomb Moscow? How long can you play defense?

---

Why would you want that? Did you forget about the nukes?

Lobbing a few strikes into the government offices in Minsk might have been a good idea if they got involved, but there is no upside to trying to strike Moscow.

Guessing Kiev has a historic old city and then a ton of modern paets. Putin would probably leave the historic part alone and level the rest.

I will admit my ignorance. Other than nukes can you explain some of the reasons to not attack their airports bases etc?

Earlier today, Russia’s ruling political party proposed nationalizing the production of any companies that withdraw from or close down in Russia during the war in Ukraine. “It’s an extreme measure, but we won’t tolerate being stabbed in the back,” said a senior party official.

— Kevin Rothrock (@KevinRothrock) March 8, 2022

The Ukraine has the Russian public on their side. No need to launch anything into Russia and have their people turn against you. The Ukraine is doing good so far and are only getting better and bigger with volunteers flowing in. They are using western battle strategies and it's paying off on all fronts.

Russia knows they're losing. Hence the reason they're shelling high rise buildings and killing innocent civilians. They're frustrated and have taken a major beat down to date. They have nothing and are going to keep getting their military killed if they don't retreat, soon.

The Ukraine is correct to tell the Russian reps. NO to their demands / requests. It's either just GTFO or your military will keep being returned in body bags.

agent-maroon said:

---

fburgtx said:

---

https://news.yahoo.com/kremlin-says-russian-military-action-115703035.html

From Reuters.

This is what Russia SAYS it wants. I don't know if it's true or not, but IF true, seems like they should get to negotiating. Those two "breakaway" republics have apparently wanted to join Russia for some time. Crimea was already gone. Neutrality?? If that means "no NATO membership", well, fair or not, it could be seen why Russia wouldn't want Ukraine to join.

Again, who knows if Russia is being honest??

---

They invaded a sovereign nation to liberate it from Nazis and their Jewish leader. They've shelled evacuees trying to escape during a "ceasefire" not just once, but twice. They've lied to their own troops about their mission and how they would be received by the everyday Ukrainian civilian.

And you're wondering if they're being honest? Seriously?

---

So at what point DO you negotiate?? Are we expecting Ukraine to "soundly" defeat Russia, push them out of Crimea and the 2 separatist states, or start pushing into Russia??

Yeah, the Russians are a-holes. OTOH, IF the next ceasefire WERE to stick, what points are to be negotiated?? Are we planning on the complete collapse of Russia, here?? Does this thing go on for months/years, until Putin REALLY gets serious, to "save face"??

I'm just asking, if negotiations WERE to be made at this point, are these terms worth agreeing to???

Eventually, folks are going to have to agree to something, or we agree to let war continue. What is a "good outcome", here?? Complete destruction of Ukraine? Complete re-establishment of pre-war Ukraine borders? Pushing Russia further into the arms of China? Resettling millions more Ukrainians into Poland/etc??

fburgtx said:

---

agent-maroon said:

---

fburgtx said:

---

https://news.yahoo.com/kremlin-says-russian-military-action-115703035.html

From Reuters.

This is what Russia SAYS it wants. I don't know if it's true or not, but IF true, seems like they should get to negotiating. Those two "breakaway" republics have apparently wanted to join Russia for some time. Crimea was already gone. Neutrality?? If that means "no NATO membership", well, fair or not, it could be seen why Russia wouldn't want Ukraine to join.

Again, who knows if Russia is being honest??

---

They invaded a sovereign nation to liberate it from Nazis and their Jewish leader. They've shelled evacuees trying to escape during a "ceasefire" not just once, but twice. They've lied to their own troops about their mission and how they would be received by the everyday Ukrainian civilian.

And you're wondering if they're being honest? Seriously?

---

So at what point DO you negotiate?? Are we expecting Ukraine to "soundly" defeat Russia, push them out of Crimea and the 2 separatist states, and start pushing into Russia??

Yeah, the Russians are a-holes. OTOH, IF the next ceasefire WERE to stick, what points are to be negotiated?? Are we planning on the complete collapse of Russia, here?? Does this thing go on for months/years, until Putin REALLY gets serious, to "save face"??

I'm just asking, if negotiations WERE to be made at this point, are these terms worth agreeing to???

Eventually, folks are going to have to agree to something, or we agree to let war continue. What is a "good outcome", here?? Complete destruction of Ukraine? Pushing Russia further into the arms of China? Resettling millions more Ukrainians into Poland/etc??

---

You negotiate when it is clear to Russia that Ukraine is going to win or when its clear to Ukraine that Russia is going to win. Vice-versa from the Russian perspective. If it's clear that Ukraine is going to win, great. If it's clear that Russia is going to win, fine.

At this point, though, Russia isn't giving up on their aims for this conquest (no Zelensky, no NATO, no Crimea, no Luhansk, no Donetsk) because they think they can still win. And they might be right, but that's not obviously clear at this point. At the same time, most, if not all, of those are unacceptable for Ukraine who still thinks they can win this.

agent-maroon said:

---

Quote:

---

So at what point DO you negotiate??

---

When they're withdrawing back across their own damn border or showing some semblance of a retreat away from Ukrainian cities or at the very least when they've stopped shelling their civilians.

"Negotiating" when they can start shelling your civilians in an instant is just a cover to buy them some time. Nothing good will come from it.

---

I can see what you're getting at. Shelling civilians is a "war crime" (but also an easy way of inflicting casualties and perhaps insuring the populace doesn't get "uppity" for years to come).

OTOH, I don't think Putin's ego will tolerate going down in history as "the guy who got his azz kicked out of Ukraine". I think there's a fine line between proving you're a real "honey badger" (for Ukraine) vs. continuing the fight with Russia to the point that Putin's ego feels obligated to utterly annihilate your country to militarily "save face" (Russia DOES still have the financial backing of China, and India is playing coy, so they WON'T be completely financially isolated).

fburgtx said:

---

agent-maroon said:

---

fburgtx said:

---

https://news.yahoo.com/kremlin-says-russian-military-action-115703035.html

From Reuters.

This is what Russia SAYS it wants. I don't know if it's true or not, but IF true, seems like they should get to negotiating. Those two "breakaway" republics have apparently wanted to join Russia for some time. Crimea was already gone. Neutrality?? If that means "no NATO membership", well, fair or not, it could be seen why Russia wouldn't want Ukraine to join.

Again, who knows if Russia is being honest??

---

They invaded a sovereign nation to liberate it from Nazis and their Jewish leader. They've shelled evacuees trying to escape during a "ceasefire" not just once, but twice. They've lied to their own troops about their mission and how they would be received by the everyday Ukrainian civilian.

And you're wondering if they're being honest? Seriously?

---

So at what point DO you negotiate?? Are we expecting Ukraine to "soundly" defeat Russia, push them out of Crimea and the 2 separatist states, or start pushing into Russia??

Yeah, the Russians are a-holes. OTOH, IF the next ceasefire WERE to stick, what points are to be negotiated?? Are we planning on the complete collapse of Russia, here?? Does this thing go on for months/years, until Putin REALLY gets serious, to "save face"??

I'm just asking, if negotiations WERE to be made at this point, are these terms worth agreeing to???

Eventually, folks are going to have to agree to something, or we agree to let war continue. What is a "good outcome", here?? Complete destruction of Ukraine? Complete re-establishment of pre-war Ukraine borders? Pushing Russia further into the arms of China? Resettling millions more Ukrainians into Poland/etc??

---

Well currently these are questions for President Zulensky and the Ukranians not us keyboard warriors and its my prayer they get to respond.

NavyAg92 said:

---

The Ukraine has the Russian public on their side. No need to launch anything into Russia and have their people turn against you. The Ukraine is doing good so far and are only getting better and bigger with volunteers flowing in. They are using western battle strategies and it's paying off on all fronts.

Russia knows they're losing. Hence the reason they're shelling high rise buildings and killing innocent civilians. They're frustrated and have taken a major beat down to date. They have nothing and are going to keep getting their military killed if they don't retreat, soon.

The Ukraine is correct to tell the Russian reps. NO to their demands / requests. It's either just GTFO or your military will keep being returned in body bags.

---

I don't think launching a scud missile into Russia serves Ukrainian's interests but I don't think it would be out of the question to conduct a special forces type raid against a Russian supply depot or staging area on the Russian Border.

A Mossad style assassination attempt on key Russian officials could also be conducted with relative anonymity.

this war is a terrible mess.

and for the sake of the civilians it needs a winner.

but stalemate & seige appears the likely outcome right now

buzzardb267 said:

---

This may have already been discussed, but I heard a retired USMC Major, that taught marines urban warfare, say while the usual force multiplier is 3:1, in urban warfare it is at least 5:1. Now i realize that is trained military against trained military, but it points out what the ruskies might be up against if they move on Kiev. I was only an engineer in Vietnam, so have no informed opinion on that, just relaying info out there.

---

I think we can see that is why the Russkies have simply surrounded or tried to surround the 5 major cities in Ukraine and are shelling them from the outskirts

Waffledynamics said:

---

JobSecurity said:

---

Earlier today, Russia’s ruling political party proposed nationalizing the production of any companies that withdraw from or close down in Russia during the war in Ukraine. “It’s an extreme measure, but we won’t tolerate being stabbed in the back,” said a senior party official.

— Kevin Rothrock (@KevinRothrock) March 8, 2022

---

Maybe stop invading a sovereign country?

It seems like Russia is getting more desperate as the economic war goes on.

---

the dependable "stab in the back" excuse from the First World War and Versailles.

what's old is new again.

Notably, from the update and other reports, it seems yesterday Russian forces attempted several attacks, including in Irpin, but also north of it (across the Irpin river), and east of Kyiv in the direction of Brovary.

Russia is clearly probing Ukrainian defensive lines.

— Michael A. Horowitz (@michaelh992) March 8, 2022

Yeah they're launching probing attacks and setting up forward logistics bases, and creating entrenched artillery positions.

If they are in fact digging in for a long siege this isn't going to end anytime soon.

Video of a Ukrainian T-80 Engaging Russian Forces in the Eastern city of Kharkiv, note the column of destroyed Russian Tigr Infantry Vehicles from the failed Russian Spetsnaz push into the city about 4 days ago. pic.twitter.com/GJ1FBxM8kD

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) March 8, 2022

Warning. Very graphic photos of dead civilians.

More reports - now including confessions of Russian POWs - that Russian army deliberately executed Ukrainian civilians. This is the price Ukrainians pay for the decades-long Western reluctantly, diplomacy and financing Putin. https://t.co/E9P0W5D6qY

— Sergej Sumlenny (@sumlenny) March 8, 2022