-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Russia/Ukraine conflict
- Thread starter amolina
- Start date
Interesting. Not sure that's best for long term but interesting.
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
Don't remember if something like this has been posted...
A six-part thread:
A six-part thread:
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
But wouldn't that scenario mean the least amount of Ukrainian casualties?
Maybe today...but not tomorrow. As was written in the Atlantic last week (pardon but I know it is posted in the thread) there is a belief that Russia needs to lose and lose big to keep from just using time to regroup like they did with Chechnya. Further it may give China wrong impression.
So, not sure how to take it. I'd welcome the reduced casualties but it comes at a need to be tremendously dedicated to Ukraine going forward. They must be in NATO. USA/Poland/UK/Germany/France and all the rest need to be there in Ukraine. Battalions on the ground. Without assurance of joining NATO next year I'd say they are better off fighting it out today.
It does look like a really, really bad movie set.
Long run, better to get rid of more Russian soldiers so the, um, Russians-For-Freedom (or whatever they’re called) guys can advance right on up to the Kremlin and set the stage for making Russia a better neighbor for Ukraine long term.
Some links that folk may find useful
Meatgrinder: Russian Tactics in the Second Year of Its Invasion of Ukraine
Russian tactics are changing as lessons are learned from military failures in the war in Ukraine.rusi.org
Russia has adapted, but it's also been a step backwards in some ways. The army they started with was heavy on equipment and light on infantry. Now they have the opposite problem. Infantry is necessary and Russia had too few early in the war, but now they have a force that is infantry heavy. Probably too much infantry, but they don't have the ability to train the skilled weapons operators, so they are throwing a lot of green troops into the infantry.
All 12 of them? The Armata is a prototype that is not ready for combat. They will likely lose a lot of them to breakdowns and the west will get their hands on some.
A lot of people have been calling BS on those pictures.
This is a couple of years old, but I have always thought it was funny in a "so true" kind of way
Very interesting thread on f16 takeoff and landing runway needs
BitJam
Active Member
I'm on board with you on it not being a false flag operation but that US report is very weak sauce.
However, the US has not been able to reach a definitive conclusion on who was responsible and only assesses with low confidence that a Ukrainian group may have been behind the incident, officials said. US officials also still believe it is unlikely that senior Ukrainian government officials, including Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, ordered the attack or knew about it beforehand.
Generally those low confidence US reports mean very little and should not be trusted. Beau of the Fifth Column did a 10 minute video back in February explaining this.The same (or a similar) group that is taking responsibility for the recent incursions into Russia also took responsibility for the drone attack on the Kremlin which I linked to earlier in this thread.
Pro-Kyiv Russian group says it 'didn't lose a single soldier' in cross-border raids on Belgorod
It's not impossible that Ukrainians are operating undercover inside of Russia but it's far easier for Russians with Russian passports to do so. If I were in charge, I wouldn't risk Ukrainian special forces operating deep inside of Russia merely to launch a few drones at the Kremlin to embarrass Putin.
bo3bdar
Member
Always possible you are ESL, but your reading comprehension is geniunely terrible. You consistently read what you want to see, not what is actually written.
In my case, I suggested it might be a false flag as a pretence to a nuclear strike, because there were coincidental stories of nukes loading on planes. We only know it was coincident after the fact, not at the time. Other people on this thread disagreed and with good arguments convinced me that the most likely scenario was internal russian insurgents like the people who killed the russian blogger in the cafe.
The other piece worth noting is that literally not a single person here claims to be infallible, or even necessarily correct. This is a very messy, very disorganized information space, and the only correct answer is to look for probabilities, not certainties. You appear to demand certainties and infallibility. You will continue to be disappointed that 'this lot' continues to change their mind when given new information.
This CNN article. Did you even read the article or just jump to conclusions based on the headline? Because it doesn't say what you said it says. And that's keeping in mind this is CNN- one of the worst news organizations in the US.
Emphasis mine. That report does not remotely say that US Intelligence believes it was likely to be Ukraine. It's a typical bullshit could-have-been article from CNN.
The best case scenario is, Russian soldiers ignore orders, and decide they don't want to fight Russians-For-Freedom.
They will only do that if they are convinced that Russians-For-Freedom are all Russians, and Russians-For-Freedom are trying to avoid killing fellow Russians.
I doubt that Russians-For-Freedom need to advance much further, they just need to create a situation where the Russian army decides not to attack them. or they get away before they can be attacked.
Sit behind strong defensive positions and wait for the next move, or sneak back across the border at the right time,
Any Russian army unit that waits in Russia defending territory from Russians-For-Freedom is far safer than they would be in Ukraine, and fewer Russians that Ukraine needs to kill or capture..
And those Russian soldiers might conclude that any delay in getting them in place to attack Russians-For-Freedom is also a good thing, and more likely to increase their chances of surviving...
Looks like they are already back across the border:-
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Waiting for your reading comprehension to advance beyond the 4th grade. That article shows confusion on all sides and has a lot of "may" and "possibly"
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
IDK...
Look at a front facing picture of the F-18... The F-18 seems to be a just as good a 'vacuum cleaner' as the F-16... And yet the Finns have been using it from road bases just as 'we the Swedes' have been doing with the Gripen...
I'm still going to guess that the Ukrainian Air Force will have thought this one through... And besides... What are the options here? The Gripen seems to be a 'non-starter' (pun intended). At least until Sweden is a member of NATO... Are there any F-18s available? Any Mirages? These four seem to be the only alternatives there are here. In reality, perhaps the only possible option is the F-16 – and perhaps the Ukrainians knows this and will just have to make it work... They should at least be able to keep A LOT of potential runways as options at any given time...
SwedishAdvocate
Active Member
I wonder what scenario the Ukrainians prefer...
I agree the Ukrainians would not have screwed up and asked for the wrong plane.
Zalushny has a headache, Arestovich on the beach in Israel, Zelensky is anywhere but Ukraine, I may be the only one hearing the choppers warming up...:
