***Russian - Ukraine War Tactical and Strategic Updates*** [Warning on OP]

7,747,180 Views | 48173 Replies | Last: 43 sec ago by richardag
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?


PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rossticus said:


I've never heard of such a thing.
nortex97
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't believe that is entirely accurate, or at least the truth is a bit more nuanced.

Quote:

According to him, there are currently "few Russian prisoners of war whom we want to exchange for Ukrainian prisoners of war - they exist, but the number is insufficient."

Instead, Russia itself is not interested in its prisoners of war and does not want to take them back.

"Sometimes Russia is more interested in using both their own prisoners of war and relatives of Ukrainian prisoners of war, but not to return ours home. And to persuade the relatives of prisoners of war that Ukraine is guilty, Ukraine does not want to, we offer something, and they are not willing," Lubinets said.
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Very confused by the word "returned" in they way it is being used. Seems like a translation issue where it it being used for both "turned over" and "received" in different sentences. Sounded to me like what he is saying is that Russia believes the prisoners Ukraine has are more valuable to Russia while they are held by Ukraine, probably for propaganda value at home.
LMCane
How long do you want to ignore this user?
twk said:

aezmvp said:

If the choice for Putin is losing Crimea and a tactical nuke, I just don't know how he doesn't use the nuke. Flatly losing Crimea would end Putin. Someone would take him out.
How is a tactical nuke going to be employed to save Crimea? Why do people keep trotting out this fantasy?
well the Russians could annihilate Kyiv with a tactical nuke-

and that would likely lead the Ukrainians to have to sue for peace.

as well as starting an even larger NATO-Russia war.

Hopefully Putin is not that insane, but if he feels he can get away with it then it's always a possibility.
Gordo14
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Really good thread
The Fife
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Can't read any of it, anyone have a summary?
B-1 83
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rossticus said:




Pretty simple. Those injured POWs suck time and resources (that Russia doesn't have) away from Ukraine. They do Mother Russia no good beyond that.
Being in TexAgs jail changes a man……..no, not really
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ukraine is past Russia's first defensive line.

"Experts believe the breakthrough is indeed a positive step for Ukrainian forces. According to Tarnavskyi, Russian forces have dedicated about 60% of their time and resources to the first line of defense. Conversely, only about 20% of available resources are dedicated to the second and third lines of defense. This is why the ISW has also estimated that Ukrainian forces are making advancements, while Russian troops are in increasingly dire circumstances."

PROGRESS

PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Much clearer picture:

PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
GAC06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm guessing they've dispersed the airworthy aircraft and this is to try to hide the remainder. I don't see any props on that one.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PJYoung said:

Much clearer picture:


"As we have explored in the past, the timing of this move, coming immediately after the announcement that Ukraine has modified its Neptune anti-ship cruise missile to hit targets on land, strongly suggests that the tires are intended to confuse incoming missiles' targeting systems."

MORE
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here's the full translation from Telegram, for anyone who's interested:

Yesterday, Ukraine announced the establishment of mixed medical commissions (QMS). During the briefing, Brigadier General Dmitry Usov, Secretary of the Coordination Headquarters for the Treatment of Prisoners of War, said that Russia did not take its wounded prisoners of war and announced the announcement of the names of the abandoned Russians.

The project "I want to live" is the first to publish lists of seriously wounded and sick prisoners of war of the Russian army, whom Russia refuses to take away.

"These are 59 Russian prisoners of war, whom Ukraine has already twice tried to unilaterally transfer to the Russian side on 11.07 and 16.08.2023. Both times, the Russian Federation refused to accept its prisoners. During this time, despite the efforts of doctors, one of the seriously wounded prisoners of war never waited to return home and died," said Dmitry Usov.

Ukraine adheres to the provisions of the Geneva Conventions on the Treatment of Prisoners of War. We constantly confirm this with actions, in particular the unilateral transfer of seriously wounded prisoners to Russia, as it was in March and April of this year.

On the contrary, the Russian Federation not only does not fulfill its international obligations under Articles 109-114 of the Geneva Conventions, and does not transfer seriously wounded Ukrainian prisoners, but also refuses to accept its own (!) Without any additional conditions. We emphasize that in this case it is not about the exchange of prisoners of war, but about repatriation.

This inhumane position of Russia forces us to take an unprecedented step - the publication of the lists. Perhaps their relatives and friends will be able to influence the Russian authorities and they will still take their soldiers back to Russia.

As we can see, the reality is at odds with Sergei Shoigu's statement that the release of prisoners is a priority for the Russian Federation.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Thread Rollup:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1699084153596379373.html

Gordo14 said:



Really good thread
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rossticus said:

Thread Rollup:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1699084153596379373.html

Gordo14 said:



Really good thread

Bret Devereaux @BretDevereaux
Ancient & military historian specializing in the Roman economy and military. PhD @UNChistory

Notice how any time Ukraine is experiencing anything less than full success, the 'realist' takes come out about how western support is cracking and we really all oughta just pack it up and give Putin what he wants? I don't think the analysis has really changed, though. 1/

It's still better for NATO interests if Russia's armed forces are bogged down in Ukraine than available for deployment elsewhere. It's still cheaper to supply Ukraine with the weapons they need than to divert resources to deal with an unencumbered Russia. 2/

It's still in the interests of the USA to signal determination through action here; there are arguments about if credibility travels or not, but I will note the Taiwanese certainly think it does (https://nytimes.com/2023/05/30/us/politics/taiwan-ambassador-ukraine-china.html) and I am inclined to believe them. 3/

It would still be very bad for our interests if Russia was allowed to revise the status quo which says that international borders may not be redrawn by force. And the cost of supporting Ukraine is still small compared to the overall cost of our security infrastructure. 4/

And of course it is still the case that global American preeminence is substantially dependent on the United States' self-presentation as the defender of democracy and of liberal democracies, so it would be a blow to American soft power not to do that here. 5/

None of that calculus has changed. And meanwhile the Ukrainian people and their elected leaders retain the will and determination to continue to resist Russian aggression. If that changes, we can have a discussion, but right now they want victory as much as peace. 6/

Does that mean we shouldn't be looking at de-escalation and war-termination scenarios? Of course not. War is bad. But because of our interest calculus, the bar for acceptable war termination scenarios right now is pretty damn high. As it should be! 7/

A lot of these "I was for it, but only so long as it was easy" takes seem to have fundamentally misunderstood what kind of war this was always going to be. Back in Feb. of 2022 the consensus I saw was that outcomes ranged from "long insurgency" to "long conventional war." 8/

That was what I put in writing as my best assessment of the western consensus here (https://acoup.blog/2022/02/25/miscellanea-understanding-the-war-in-ukraine/) on Feb 25th. And on that assessment, we are basically on the leading edge of "best case outcomes for Ukraine" right now. 9/

In short, there is not a lot of actual realism in these 'realist' takes. To be blunt, I think a proper realist analysis, one focused on interests, would conclude that it is in NATO's interest to twist the knife in Putin's self-inflicted wound as sharply as possible. 10/

Instead, what I think we're seeing is efforts by folks to smuggle back into the discussion priors which were fatally undermined by the course of the war to date under the label of 'realism.'
And that's not realism - that's an ideological commitment masquerading as realism. /end.

I should add one thing, which is the argument that the other economic costs (mostly energy costs) to the West are too high. Those costs are baked in. Russian gas isn't coming back to Europe. That cost is as sunk as the Moskva and so doesn't figure in peace analysis.
PlaneCrashGuy
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Now I'm confused. He starts with the supposition that Ukraine is currently experiencing something "less than full success," and cites this as the reason that "the 'realist' takes come out about how western support is cracking..."

He then concludes that "we are basically on the leading edge of "best case outcomes for Ukraine" right now."

I don't understand how he arrives at that conclusion from his starting point that it isn't going well.
I'm not sure if people genuinely believe someone is going to say, "Wow, if some people say I'm a moron for not believing this, it clearly must be true."

It's not much a persuasive argument. It really just sounds like a bunch of miniature dachshunds barking because the first one one barked when it thought it heard something.
Rossticus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In the context of the tweet I take "less than full success" to mean less than "rapid, large scale progress" and "zero defeats". One can still experience a realistic best case scenario (ie pushing back the invasion and continuing to make incremental progress while heavily attriting Russian forces) without experiencing perfection in all operations.

"Not doing well" as you phrase it would look more like steady Russian progress across the entire front with Russia in control of the areas they've claimed to annex. Ukraine isn't doing perfectly by a long shot but to say they haven't done well given expectations and the reality of their situation isn't a terribly honest assessment either.
txags92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
B-1 83 said:

Rossticus said:




Pretty simple. Those injured POWs suck time and resources (that Russia doesn't have) away from Ukraine. They do Mother Russia no good beyond that.
Plus they make it clear to the folks back home that Russia is not winning and all is not going according to plan.
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Rossticus said:

In the context of the tweet I take "less than full success" to mean less than "rapid, large scale progress".
Yep. Lots of basement armchair quarterbacks in a day and age of instant gratification perplexed that the Ukes haven't won the war already.

They're only vastly outnumbered and going up against the supposed number 2 military in the world. But since they held Kyiv, they're magically just supposed to steam roll Russia like we did Iraq. Except without air control just because the west has supplied a hodge podge list of old equipment. It's not like they're fighting against a dug in enemy or anything.

They're succeeding more than anyone (including our military experts) ever thought they could. But as he said, pre-conceived agendas are the problem.
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
There is no way anyone looks at where Ukraine is now and then compares it to what they thought would happen in February of 2022 and not come to the conclusion that Ukraine has had an enormous amount of success while Russia not.
AgLA06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
And yet we have lots of supposed "media' and influential figures who do just that anytime an offensive takes slower than hoped or Russia launches an offensive and take a little ground.

We saw it a lot of the last month. Even from some in our own government. And that's his point. Don't fall for Russia supporters or media / influential people that have been bought off.
snizzler22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
First Challenger-2 tank destroyed in combat near Robotyne, but more importantly it's reported the crew survived. It apparently hit a mine and was then targeted by a Lancet drone while disabled.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/first-ever-challenger-2-tank-lost-in-combat/
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
snizzler22 said:

First Challenger-2 tank destroyed in combat near Robotyne, but more importantly it's reported the crew survived. It apparently hit a mine and was then targeted by a Lancet drone while disabled.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/first-ever-challenger-2-tank-lost-in-combat/
MORE
snizzler22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
IMHO that reinforces its survivability to be operating in that hot of an area for weeks with only 1 lost.
Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here's some background on that Russian pilot who defected to Ukraine in his helo.

FLIGHT
Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Good God.

Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pretty good Speak the Truth episode with Matt instead of Rob this time. Lots of information and cutting through propaganda of both sides.



Edit: Unsure of why it won't embed.
Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Quote:

Shahed drones attack was reported in the south of Odesa region
https://liveuamap.com/en/2023/6-september-shahed-drones-attack-was-reported-in-the-south

Interesting and bold, especially considering some drones crashed inside Romania yesterday.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Ukraine attempts to exploit the recent breach of the main Russian defensive line.

Today's SITREP.
74OA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Gallant Russia at work liberating Ukraine from the Nazis.

PJYoung
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Teslag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
74OA said:

Gallant Russia at work liberating Ukraine from the Nazis.




And this is in the part of Ukraine that supposedly is "ethically Russian" and voted for independence.
Waffledynamics
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
First Page Last Page
Page 1197 of 1377
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.