74OA said:

---

Read the text imbedded in each map. JOMINI

---

Ukraine needs a lot more ammo, and, God willing, allied troops. Someone needs to put boots on the ground, and it won't likely happen, unfortunately.

Russians continue to reinforce Snake Island.

Nothing is getting in or out of Odessa by sea so long as it's occupied.

74OA said:

---

Russians continue to reinforce Snake Island.

Nothing is getting in or out of Odessa by sea so long as it's occupied.

---

Sounds like an appropriate use of ALCMs.

JFABNRGR said:

---

74OA said:

---

Russians continue to reinforce Snake Island.

Nothing is getting in or out of Odessa by sea so long as it's occupied.

---

Sounds like an appropriate use of ALCMs.

---

Glancing at the map, it appears Ukraine should be able to range SI from the coast using HIMARs or their dual-mission Harpoons?

74OA said:

---

Russians continue to reinforce Snake Island.

---

That's an expensive 42 acre target. HIMARS launchers with a dozen long range rockets (500lb warheads) would do it. NATO restrictions on long range rockets is the problem. Total game changer if NATO ever gets serious about winning this war.

Hopefully, seeing the destruction first-hand will generate some urgency from these guys. GERMANY, ITALY, FRANCE

benchmark said:

---

74OA said:

---

Russians continue to reinforce Snake Island.

---

That's an expensive 42 acre target. HIMARS launchers with a dozen long range rockets (500lb warheads) would do it. NATO restrictions on long range rockets is the problem. Total game changer if NATO ever gets serious about winning this war.

---

Did something change? HIMARS that can reach Snake Island have indeed been approved.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/01/himars-what-are-the-advanced-rockets-us-is-sending-ukraine

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-western-artillery-donbas-russian-progress/31878980.html#:~:text=While%20the%20HIMARS%20rockets%20approved,they%20can%20reach%20Snake%20Island.

Seeing Russian submarines and ships safely docked less that 200 miles away is beyond frustrating. If NATO wants to end this war they'll have to supply Ukraine with long range HIMARS and cruise missiles capable of reaching nearby ports, bridges, supply depots, transportation hubs, airfields, and command/control centers. It's the only reason Russia will be interested in negotiating.

Otherwise, Russia digs in for an artillery dual. Donbas 2.0 with neither side able to mount a serious offensive.

Three #Russian submarines are reportedly moored at the naval base in #Sevastopol

Cruise missiles expected to be loaded.#Ukraine #UkraineWar #UkraineRussiaWar pic.twitter.com/sn9CD761zd

— 🇺🇦Ukraine News Live🇺🇦 (@UkraineNewsLive) June 12, 2022

Waffledynamics said:

---

74OA said:

---

Read the text imbedded in each map. JOMINI

---

Ukraine needs a lot more ammo, and, God willing, allied troops. Someone needs to put boots on the ground, and it won't likely happen, unfortunately.

---

Europe got used to the US guaranteeing their safety.

Hope this is a wake up call for everyone.

Hate to see the individual suffering.

74OA said:

---

docb said:

---

I agree. It's looking like our current admin just wants to keep giving them just enough to prolong their death.

---

Bull***** $40B+ and counting from the current admin is a massive effort on our part. We've done more than anyone, even back before the war when no one would believe us when we warned Putin is really coming.

If you want to point fingers, point them at Ukraine's next-door European neighbors. Except for Poland, UK and a handful of the tiny countries in the east, wealthy western Europe is the one giving just enough to get by.

---

Then GDit give them the weapon range they need! And make it a fair fight!

docb said:

---

I agree. It's looking like our current admin just wants to keep giving them just enough to prolong their death.

---

It's a cruel and calculated NATO strategy IMO ... feed Ukraine just enough weapons to keep 100-200K Russians tied up at an arms-length from NATO. Short sighted in my view because a stalemate risks a larger crisis - global food/energy shortages that begat global economic/political instability. IMO, it's not in NATO's long term interest to throttle Ukraine ... send Ukraine long range weapons to help end the war.

74OA said:

---

That's not on us alone. The US has been out in front leading support for Ukraine from the very beginning.

---

True. But NATO generally follows our lead and we've slow-played Ukraine on weapons.

aggiehawg said:

---

benchmark said:

---

True. But NATO generally follows our lead and we've slow-played Ukraine on weapons.

---

No NATO has not followed our lead for a long while now. If anything, Poland was trying to lead and we held them back. UK is in front of us. France will always be surrender monkeys. Germans are afraid of their perception as being aggressive. And the rest of the former Soviet satellites in NATO are crapping their pants because they know they could be next on Putin's Peter the Great Revenge Tour.

---

Mostly true. However, we set the rules on the timeline for advanced weapon deliveries ... and we've slow-played Ukraine. The most recent example are HIMARS. The previous example was artillery. Everyone else is now following our lead on long range artillery ... including France and Germany albeit more slowly.

I do not see what Western Europe has to gain for not contributing more to stop russia now. Do they think they can just drop sanctions and buy cheap oil again if russia plows through UKR? My guess is probably yes.

The longer the war goes on the more politicians and defense companies make. Most EU countries have been doing little to help or curtail the Russians since they need cheap energy from a country they know is trying to grab influence in the EU, Asia, and Africa. China has been doing the same and no countries care, as long as short term it doesn't effect the next election so the politicians can remain in office they don't care.

Ukraine can't win if they fight standard artillery battles or a conventional war. Russia has too many troops, too many weapons, and too many resources. Ukraine needs to pick its battles and pick when they want to fight. And unless they start taking out more sea assets from Russia they will be sitting ducks for the areas that Russia is really wanting to take. The USA has not learned anything and keeps thinking of short term wars are the same as long term battles.

There are times I feel the US does a great job helping but I don't think we are thinking long term. Yeah we can give them all these weapons but when Russia wants to take an area they do with sure manpower. Russia has always seen themselves as a bear, just overpower everyone and move on. You don't fight a bear on its terms, you do when it makes sense to you.

There have been a few battles that are a copy from WWII and a lot of lessons can be learned from 2 books. The Clay Pigeons of St Lo and Band of Brothers. But Ukraine keeps trying to puff up its chest and fight Russia head on, it will never work.

There have been a lot of weapon system, slow-play delays. The NATO crapshow over the 29 MIGS seems like yesterday. But we are where we are. The Ukes definitely need more sophisticated stand off (MLRS etc.) to grind down the bazillion arty systems raining hell on them.

That said, I think the Southern axis may be the key to gaining some positive momentum. Find a way to take Kherson, cutoff supply from Crimea and chip your way toward Mariopul. Not an easy feat indeed, but would force the Russians to redirect forces down from the Donbas.

Taking that naval base out would greatly help the food crisis being talked about so much lately

Russia can't meet NATO forces directly. Best way to make sure that doesn't happen soon is to squarely defeat them via Ukraine. Best way to make sure it never happens is to bleed them as long as possible in Ukraine.

Another video of American volunteers during a firefight.

Also from Jimmyhttps://t.co/errPnUyH0x
Part 1#Russia #Ukraine https://t.co/cjlr5LSbBA pic.twitter.com/Nl4mm30WCM

— BlueSauron👁️ (@Blue_Sauron) June 12, 2022

Waffledynamics said:

---

benchmark said:

---

74OA said:

---

Russians continue to reinforce Snake Island.

---

That's an expensive 42 acre target. HIMARS launchers with a dozen long range rockets (500lb warheads) would do it. NATO restrictions on long range rockets is the problem. Total game changer if NATO ever gets serious about winning this war.

---

Did something change? HIMARS that can reach Snake Island have indeed been approved.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/01/himars-what-are-the-advanced-rockets-us-is-sending-ukraine

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-western-artillery-donbas-russian-progress/31878980.html#:~:text=While%20the%20HIMARS%20rockets%20approved,they%20can%20reach%20Snake%20Island.

---

The Guardian article you linked stayed that the HIMARS are only coming with the 274mm rockets and not the ATACM missiles. The rockets don't have anything closeto a 500ib warhead. Even if the Ukes placed the few HIMARS that they have on the coast it would not be enough to destroy or neutralize the Russian position on Snake Island. The HIMARS can do them far more good in the east.

More intense front line action

GAC06 said:

---

What's wrong with you?

---

Probably better to debate the merits of the video than resort to ad hominem posts.

It seems to be orchestrated propaganda but it is worth a watch nonetheless because there is still information that can be had from it and it is useful to see how one side is framing the issue internally or to sympathizers.

Also, Ukraine would have to conduct an assault on the island to interdict it. They don't really have the weaponry to suppress it but they could occupy it. They'd really have to dig in if they took it back and then hope the new long range anti ship missiles could keep a counter landing away.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

It seems to be orchestrated propaganda but it is worth a watch nonetheless because there is still information that can be had from it and it is useful to see how one side is framing the issue internally or to sympathizers.

---

Yeah, the interview was predictable considering it was filmed in occupied Ukraine and in the presence of armed Russians. My primary takeaway came from this exchange (not verbatim) with the villager in the blue t-shirt who was trying to be very neutral with his replies for obvious reasons:

Q: "I've heard there will be a referendum. What percentage of people are for Ukraine or Russia?"
A: "There were 1000 people in the village. 60 remain. The rest went to Ukraine."

It's telling that the vast majority voted with their feet for Ukraine. Surprised that section wasn't edited out.

"The team of researchers at the Oryx blog, which counts Russian military equipment losses in Ukraine based on photographs sent from the front lines, says that Russia is now visually confirmed to have lost at least 2539 military vehicles and pieces of equipment since it began its invasion of Ukraine on February 24."

LOSSES

74OA said:

---

"The team of researchers at the Oryx blog, which counts Russian military equipment losses in Ukraine based on photographs sent from the front lines, says that Russia is now visually confirmed to have lost at least 2539 military vehicles and pieces of equipment since it began its invasion of Ukraine on February 24."

LOSSES

---

Anyone know how much equipement we lost in the 2 decades we fought in Iraq and Afghanistan?

I always assumed the real number of destroyed Russian equipment was somewhere between Oryx confirmed visuals and the Ukraine number. However, at this point it is difficult to believe there are many damaged vehicles in Ukraine held territory that haven't been found to date outside of the front lines to justify the number being anything other than Oryx's number.

I guess technically many of the damaged pieces could have been hauled back to Russia over the last 3.5 months to be refitted and used again which would skew the numbers.

Either way, the fact Russia is having to resurrect stored equipment means they've lost a large amount of their war capabilities.

Lots of updates within minutes of each other on LiveUaMap. Things seem to be kicking into high gear all of a sudden.

I've got spotty reception where I am right now, but other posters may want to look there and post updates here.