Russia's Invasion of Ukraine (Official Thread)

[Carl Tethers]

An HL poster who is going to get his full complement of negs if this war goes past October....

Choo choo

 

[Orbital-Fetus]

An HL poster who is going to get his full complement of negs if this war goes past October....

 

[Carl Tethers]

Somehow I became a HL poster...

I only started posting in HL to facetiously hype up Biden, won't bullshyt

 

[Hood Critic]

this right here is what's going to lead us straw into a world War, over Ukraine of all places.

Supplying a missile defense system?...hardly.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Somehow I became a HL poster...

Stick around bro. This is what I've been facing all these years.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[Carl Tethers]

Supplying a missile defense system?...hardly.

Defense systems? That's how you get World Wars

 

[newarkhiphop]

crazy how this sentiment of not our problem is still around, the U.S thought the same of germany right up until germany tried to link up with mexico against the U.S.

it's incredibly naïve to still believe putin would have been satisfied with just ukraine. europe and the united states finally realized putin is not a rational actor and his word doesn't mean shyt. they saw a confrontation as inevitable and ukraine is rightfully defending their sovereignty and is willing to die for it.

I guess another issue I have with this, is where was this energy when he took Crimea? I didn't follow that event as much as this one but it seems like that was just allowed to happen

 

[987654321]

Super unpopular opinion here yall gimme hell if you want but, there's no reason we should be fighting this proxy war ppl here cheerleadering and laugh at Ukraine "whooping" Russia when we know what it is, intelligence and arms being provided mostly by us.

Yes long story short I'm saying we should have let Ukraine go at it by themselves or at least let the Europeans by themselves worry about it. Instead we are slowly leading the March into what will be a massive world wide conflict unfortunately

There would be one anyways. Russia has been trying, for years, to put itself in position to use energy to extort everyone. Letting Ukraine be taken would have just accelerated things plus the possibility of extortion with crops and gas. A strong independent Ukraine makes Russia useless. An ass whoppin with outside arms and intel is still an ass whoppin, no less. I get that it’s ugly but we don’t live in a narrative. This is how it is, it’s nothing new, and it won’t be the last time either.

 

[Liu Kang]

The failed thunder run
The failure to properly support an Air Assault
The failure to successfully perform follow on air assaults
The failure to perform a mass parachute jump
A failure to distribute force and support
Failure to Protect naval assets that support the ground forces
Failure to maintain an early logistical chain
The list goes on and on.

Everything boils down to either them not knowing how to perform, not having correct or existing logistics, not rehearsing or training on what they’re supposed to do, not securing the air, or making it easy for 100% of the local population to hate you.

We were able to do everything we did because we had all that stuff in place every step of the way. And no matter how bad things got, some of the population had our back.

All of our movements are planned, visualized, rehearsed repeatedly until we can do it without sleep or food, we rehearse so much that contingencies for the contingencies come naturally as air. We can always adapt and support each other because we always know where ourselves and others are supposed to be. We also always have a lot of supporting firepower above and behind us. Even if we didn’t we have the force density to tough it out until there, which is why our smaller formations can beat up on bigger ones.

I can write a ten page essay on the failed air assault alone. Every large operation looks like something they saw in one of our documentaries or a command staff PowerPoint, and some general brought it to Putin like “this is what we’re going to do to bring the Ukrainians to their knees”.

They skip all the mandatory steps to prepare an operation and try to skip to the fun parts. It’s like taking kids who learned to hoop from and1 mixtapes and having them try out for a college basketball team. You get a bunch of guys chucking, trying to break ankles, hogging the ball, skipping defense, completely missing fundamentals.

I was listening to an excellent military podcast in the episode there was a Russian doctrine expert (I'm not a military breh and I'm translating so some of the terms might not be accurate)

Basically said that Russia's doctrine since WW2 has been :
- far too heavily influenced by WW2
- in opposition of Western doctrine(s)
- infantry/artillery based

Coupled with a strictly vertical and "systemic" command chain which does not give officers much room for improvisation and soldiers zero initiative, the failures of this war made total sense.

Dude said that the VKS (Russian Air Forces) in the russian doctrine is marginalized because the might of its armed forces is with the artillery and the sheer number of its infantry. Because of that air support is often subordinated to the infantry commander with little to no autonomy.

That leads to coordination issues in the field : when there are different battalions in the same operation, they all have their own air support which answers only to their battalion commander and do not really interact between each other.

Russia also did not develop any true response against air defence which was good in Ukraine. Basically, the Russian doctrine in opposition to the West, do not use its air force to cripple enemy's defences as it's the artillery's role. From a russian pov, it's dumb to send an aircraft against systems that are designed to down them overall considering how expensive they are.

The consistent opposition to Western doctrines is also a way to emphasize on their own strenghts with the will to show they can do the same as the West but differently.

All in all, that's some of the reasons of the failures and the difference between the West and Russia. Podcast was like 1h30 long so there were some other stuff also regarding training, strategies and organization but that should give a good summary.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I was listening to an excellent military podcast in the episode there was a Russian doctrine expert (I'm not a military breh and I'm translating so some of the terms might not be accurate)

Basically said that Russia's doctrine since WW2 has been :
- far too heavily influenced by WW2
- in opposition of Western doctrine(s)
- infantry/artillery based

Coupled with a strictly vertical and "systemic" command chain which does not give officers much room for improvisation and soldiers zero initiative, the failures of this war made total sense.

Dude said that the VKS (Russian Air Forces) in the russian doctrine is marginalized because the might of its armed forces is with the artillery and the sheer number of its infantry. Because of that air support is often subordinated to the infantry commander with little to no autonomy.

That leads to coordination issues in the field : when there are different battalions in the same operation, they all have their own air support which answers only to their battalion commander and do not really interact between each other.

Russia also did not develop any true response against air defence which was good in Ukraine. Basically, the Russian doctrine in opposition to the West, do not use its air force to cripple enemy's defences as it's the artillery's role. From a russian pov, it's dumb to send an aircraft against systems that are designed to down them overall considering how expensive they are.

The consistent opposition to Western doctrines is also a way to emphasize on their own strenghts with the will to show they can do the same as the West but differently.

All in all, that's some of the reasons of the failures and the difference between the West and Russia. Podcast was like 1h30 long so there were some other stuff also regarding training, strategies and organization but that should give a good summary.

 

[987654321]

I was listening to an excellent military podcast in the episode there was a Russian doctrine expert (I'm not a military breh and I'm translating so some of the terms might not be accurate)

Basically said that Russia's doctrine since WW2 has been :
- far too heavily influenced by WW2
- in opposition of Western doctrine(s)
- infantry/artillery based

Coupled with a strictly vertical and "systemic" command chain which does not give officers much room for improvisation and soldiers zero initiative, the failures of this war made total sense.

Dude said that the VKS (Russian Air Forces) in the russian doctrine is marginalized because the might of its armed forces is with the artillery and the sheer number of its infantry. Because of that air support is often subordinated to the infantry commander with little to no autonomy.

That leads to coordination issues in the field : when there are different battalions in the same operation, they all have their own air support which answers only to their battalion commander and do not really interact between each other.

Russia also did not develop any true response against air defence which was good in Ukraine. Basically, the Russian doctrine in opposition to the West, do not use its air force to cripple enemy's defences as it's the artillery's role. From a russian pov, it's dumb to send an aircraft against systems that are designed to down them overall considering how expensive they are.

The consistent opposition to Western doctrines is also a way to emphasize on their own strenghts with the will to show they can do the same as the West but differently.

All in all, that's some of the reasons of the failures and the difference between the West and Russia. Podcast was like 1h30 long so there were some other stuff also regarding training, strategies and organization but that should give a good summary.

Forget WW2, they’re still using doctrine from the 1800’s lol. They’re about to have a bad November lol

 

[bnew]

I guess another issue I have with this, is where was this energy when he took Crimea? I didn't follow that event as much as this one but it seems like that was just allowed to happen

the landscape in various aspects was very different but more importantly obama was being prudent about legacy. you can tell a lot of the choices obama made was rooted in preserving his presidential legacy as the first black president. biden didn't come with that baggage and he's old school so russias antics are a no go.

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

I guess another issue I have with this, is where was this energy when he took Crimea? I didn't follow that event as much as this one but it seems like that was just allowed to happen

It takes the immune system a second to kick in and realize what we're looking at

It was Georgia. Crimea. Syria. ...then ALL the European assassinations, poisonings, and suspicious deaths. Even a few in DC. Then Trump?!?

Yeah, it was a wrap.

Putin played himself. CIA pushed that button.

 

[newarkhiphop]