Russia's Invasion of Ukraine (Official Thread)

[Orbital-Fetus]

And yet, with all of that intel, they're still bleeding troops at a 7:1 ratio with Ukraine.

As for destroying cities...

The key to this strategy is to eliminate defensive positions and potential defensive positions of the enemy. Aside from the humanitarian issues, the strategy works if, and only if, the attacking side has the plan and logistics to capture and hold beyond that point.

The Russians have shown their lines are heavily susceptible to counter offensives. By leveling cities, the Russians ensure they don't have a fall back point, causing them to give up more territory in the event of a retreat. During the Kherson offensive last fall, the Russians couldn't run away fast enough. Many were killed while retreating. Without the ability to set up defensive positions within the cities they capture, they will have to rely on trenches and dirt mounds, which fall quickly under Ukrainian attack.

TL;DR - By leveling cities, the Russians stretch the no-mans land which put them at a disadvantage in the event of retreat.

If I may...

When it comes to urban warfare, defending against attacks in rubble from destroyed buildings can be preferable to defending in standing structures for a number of reasons:

1. Improved visibility and situational awareness: In a standing structure, defenders may have limited visibility due to walls, doors, and other structures blocking their line of sight. In contrast, defending in rubble can provide a wider field of view, allowing defenders to see approaching threats from a distance and react accordingly.
2. Greater cover and concealment: Defenders in a rubble-filled area have the advantage of using the debris as cover and concealment, making it more difficult for attackers to locate and target them. In a standing structure, defenders may have limited options for cover, and the structure itself may provide little protection against heavy weapons.
3. Increased mobility: The rubble and debris in a destroyed building can provide natural obstacles for attackers, limiting their ability to maneuver and making it easier for defenders to move around the area. This increased mobility can be especially important when defending against multiple attackers or when trying to coordinate with other units.
4. Reduced risk of collapse: In a standing structure, defenders run the risk of the building collapsing if it is heavily damaged or if explosives are used. In contrast, rubble from a destroyed building is already on the ground and poses less risk of collapse, providing a more stable environment for defenders.
5. Strategic advantages: Defending in rubble can also provide strategic advantages, such as the ability to set up ambushes or to use the terrain to funnel attackers into specific areas, making it easier to pick them off or to coordinate counterattacks.

 

[JetFueledThoughts]

Can someone give me their best assessment of where this war is at, in 4 sentences or less?

 

[Orbital-Fetus]

Can someone give me their best assessment of where this war is at, in 4 sentences or less?

Russia invaded Ukraine.
Ukraine is fighting back.
The West is backing Ukraine.
Putin is big mad.

 

[Cuban Pete]

Can someone give me their best assessment of where this war is at, in 4 sentences or less?

Ukraine is defending very very well and successfully denying major Russian gains, but the Russians are learning and making small but steady gains over the last month and a half in the East. If the West can get our weapons to Ukraine fast enough, the Ukies have a good chance of gaining back all their shyt by next year with some counter offensives. If we slow step, or if China steps in on Russias side like they been hinting at, we enter a meat grinder that inevitably favors Russia and either the war never ends or Russia wins.

 

[Orbital-Fetus]

Ukraine is defending very very well and successfully denying major Russian gains, but the Russians are learning and making small but steady gains over the last month and a half in the East. If the West can get our weapons to Ukraine fast enough, the Ukies have a good chance of gaining back all their shyt by next year with some counter offensives. If we slow step, or if China steps in on Russias side like they been hinting at, we enter a meat grinder that inevitably favors Russia and either the war never ends or Russia wins.

And a good possibility that Zelenskyy marches into Moscow riding on top of an M-1 Abrams, seizing control of the Duma and Kremlin making Zelenskyy the default leader of Russia and Ukraine. Of course this is followed up by a Ukrainian invasion into Belarus to depose Europe's last dictator. After that it's anyone's guess.

 

[NZA]

Can someone give me their best assessment of where this war is at, in 4 sentences or less?

a shockingly archaic european proxy war is taking a huge toll on both participants. russia has fallen back on the one thing it can do well. ukraine is in a tight situation since they only have the strength to fight but not to win. we just want to keep them fighting as long as possible to drain russian resources and social cohesion.

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

Getting warmer

 

[bnew]

Ukraine Hopes the New IRIS-T Weapon System Will Protect it From Suicide Drones

Ukraine has deployed a weapons system so advanced that the country who makes it doesn’t even have one yet.

www.vice.com

 

[Liu Kang]

About Bakhmut : Institute for the Study of War

Bakhmut is not intrinsically significant operationally or strategically as ISW has previously observed. Taking Bakhmut is necessary but not sufficient for further Russian advances in Donetsk Oblast, and Russian forces have already taken such heavy losses fighting for the city that their attack will very likely culminate after they have secured it—if not before. The loss of Bakhmut is not, therefore, of major operational or strategic concern to Ukraine, as Secretary Austin and others have observed.

But Ukraine’s fight for Bakhmut has become strategically significant because of the current composition of Russian forces arrayed in the area. Some Western reports have recently suggested that Ukraine is expending its own elite manpower and scarce equipment on mainly Wagner Group prison recruits who are mere cannon fodder, noting that such an exchange would be to Ukraine’s disadvantage even at high ratios of Russian to Ukrainian losses. That observation is valid in general, although the pool of Russian convict recruits suitable for combat is not limitless and the permanent elimination of tens of thousands of them in Bakhmut means that they will not be available for more important fights.

Russian forces fighting in Bakhmut are now drawn from the elite elements of the Wagner Group and from Russian airborne units as well as from lower-quality troops. Ukrainian intelligence has supported ISW’s assessment that Russian forces near Bakhmut have recently changed tactics and committed higher-quality special forces operators and elements of conventional forces to the fight.[5] ISW has previously reported on the increasing presence of Russian Airborne (VDV) forces around Bakhmut since late December into early January, indicating that conventional Russian troops may be supporting or even supplanting Wagner’s operations around Bakhmut.[6] The Wagner Group is still likely using prisoners to support operations in Bakhmut, albeit to a much more limited extent than in previous months due to massive losses suffered by those recruits in attritional frontal assaults. But Wagner has now also committed its very best soldiers to the fight, and it is they who are being attrited along with the conscripts.

The Battle of Bakhmut may, in fact, severely degrade the Wagner Group’s best forces, depriving Russia of some of its most effective and most difficult-to-replace shock troops. The Wagner attacks already culminated once, causing the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) to commit some of its elite airborne troops to the fight. It may well culminate again before taking the city, once more forcing the Russian military to choose between abandoning the effort or throwing more high-quality troops into the battle. The opportunity to damage the Wagner Group’s elite elements, along with other elite units if they are committed, in a defensive urban warfare setting where the attrition gradient strongly favors Ukraine is an attractive one.

 

[cobra]

/I'm still monitoring the whole China question a lot, I feel like that's the most terrifying prospect right now. If China actually chooses to arm Russia in any visible way, it could prove difficult for Ukraine to ever expel Russia militarily. Since Russia has over 3x the population and doesn't have to deal with a refugee situation, they're more likely to win a war of straight attrition, or at least make it even more horrifying for the Ukrainian people on the way there.

USA and EU have threatened China so much over it that you have to question, why would they even consider doing it? What do they have to gain? It's not like Russia has much to offer them, and Russia is desperate for trade partners so they have no way to threaten them. So it would seem they have a ton more to lose from US/EU sanctions than to gain from whatever Russia offers. You figure the only reason they would do that would be if they wished to weaken/deplete the West in some serious manner. And that would likely only work in the short term. So why would China want to weaken/deplete the West in the short term? I can't come up with very happy answers.

Anyone heard/have an alternate take on it? Why would China even consider sending Russia weapons, knowing how strong the response will be. Do they just assume they're too big to fail and that the West wouldn't dare sanction them?

they want to weaken the US in the short term so they can take Taiwan

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

 

[PoorAndDangerous]

Do you all think Biden is giving Ukraine long range missiles on the low?

 

[NZA]

Do you all think Biden is giving Ukraine long range missiles on the low?

no, but they are training two pilots on F15s. that would let them hit any part of the donbas region with precision but with a lot of risk of being shot down. i think long range missiles are considered too provocative

 

[PoorAndDangerous]

no, but they are training two pilots on F15s. that would let them hit any part of the donbas region with precision but with a lot of risk of being shot down. i think long range missiles are considered too provocative

Such a fine line. I don’t envy Biden.