Ukrainian War Developments

[Jingle Bells]

We are not???

I think the majority of us here, regardless of the political stand, strive to bring contents with more substance than that. You could certainly bring twitter contents, but at least show in your post that you have critically examined the content, and bring forth your own thoughts based on an adequate knowledge base. (I was educated extensively on that by @Bltizo on that in another thread).

However, this tweet he shares and his remarks has major flaws in it, especially related to technicality of military/weapons, which shows that he is not even serious and up to standard of this forum. This forum is ABOUT military and weapons. Even those who post here with off-topic political discussion actually has a lot of thoughts and contents put into their posts.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Any evidence to support that claim? (That Tochkas keep being intercepted that is.)

February 26:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

March 20:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

March 15:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Want more?

 

[Stealthflanker]

RWA tweet mention Belgorod oblast. Which maybe he meant "Oktyabr'skii"

Which located in Belgorod oblast indeed and near the border. This is well within range of Tochka U (Assuming it is really a Tochka strike in the first place)

 

[Richard Santos]

How much sanctions cost Russia will largely be dependent on how China acts

not net cost to russia, gross cost to russia from EU sanction.

 

[Phead128]

Dude, that makes no sense.
1. Did Ukraine Join NATO or at least gotten MAP (membership action plan) in the last 8 years? No.
2. Did "Zelensky Regime" wanted to get into NATO 8 years ago? No.
3. How on earth can "getting rid of Zelensky Regime" do anything to prevent other Ukrainians politicians assuming the role of Zelensky after your Russia gotten rid of him and his regime? Are your Russia going to kill off all Ukrainian politicians except for the pro-Russia hardliners? Do you think that's even possible?
4. If Ukraine didn't join NATO in the last 8 year, nor did it even gotten a MAP, what make you think after this current war, Ukraine can just be a NATO member all of sudden, before Russian can react with another war? The only way this happens is if Ukraine can defeat Russia in the battle field, and got no land loss and even gotten Crimea back. Do you really think there is a high enough possibility for this happen to warrant a discussion about it?
5. As for this current war in Ukraine, even though Russia is winning, it should be very clear now that at the current Russian strength level, they don't have a good change securing and annexing all of Eastern Ukraine (East of Dnieper River) without dragging on the war longer than they can afford.

I agree with all of your excellent points.

For #5, I hope they just throw the entire military might at Ukraine. Why only commit 200K and drag this war so long with "manuevers warfare", for fuck sakes, send in the entire army. Why keep troops in reserves?

 

[Jingle Bells]

RWA tweet mention Belgorod oblast. Which maybe he meant "Oktyabr'skii"

Which located in Belgorod oblast indeed and near the border. This is well within range of Tochka U (Assuming it is really a Tochka strike in the first place)

View attachment 86171

What is the range of Tochka U?

I went back to the original tweet and realize that I misread. It was "Oktyabrsky, belgorod Oblast". I misread it as "Oktyabrsky, Volgograd Oblast". Okey that does make sense as Oktyabr'skii in Belgorod Oblast is only 10 km from the border, and only 50 km from Kharkov. This make sense.

Because if it's "Oktyabrsky, Volgograd Oblast", it would certainly raise A LOT of questions. My bad.

@Bill Blazo: My bad, you could have replied and pointed out my mistakes.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

I agree with all of your excellent points.

For #5, I hope they just throw the entire military might at Ukraine. Why only commit 200K and drag this war so long with "manuevers warfare", for fuck sakes, send in the entire army. Why keep troops in reserves?

They are keeping troops in reserve for other provocations like what we see with Azerbaijan or a rerun of Kazakhstan. Or worse, a direct intervention by NATO.

 

[Abominable]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Macron doubling down on the refusal to pay for gas in roubles. Not sure why he needed to call Putin to tell him that.

 

[asif iqbal]

I agree with all of your excellent points.

For #5, I hope they just throw the entire military might at Ukraine. Why only commit 200K and drag this war so long with "manuevers warfare", for fuck sakes, send in the entire army. Why keep troops in reserves?

you can throw in 2 million troops it wont solve the problem when there is a strategic failure

when you have a water leak you first fix the leak then repair the damage

you dont repair the damage before stopping the water coming in because its a losing battle

same with the weapons pouring in like water from Western Ukraine, Norway alone sent 6,000 ATGM

Russia is fighting a losing battle with Ukraine awash with so many guerrilla weapons MANPADS + ATGM excellent for this type of warfare

the weapons shipments must be stopped as soon as they enter, once they are in they disperse and away no way to track them

Russia should have sent a army to secure the Western border

 

[Jingle Bells]

I agree with all of your excellent points.

For #5, I hope they just throw the entire military might at Ukraine. Why only commit 200K and drag this war so long with "manuevers warfare", for fuck sakes, send in the entire army. Why keep troops in reserves?

Well, if I remember correctly, you were talking about "blitzkrieg" earlier on the conflict. I might be wrong.

But the thing is, you can't do an exact "blitzkrieg" with today's military technology, and Russian forces available to this campaign is NOT enough for even a modified-for-modern-warfare version of a "blitzkrieg".

I know you want a clean, "摧枯拉朽、秋风扫落叶" style one-fell-swoop fast war by the Russians. But they are NOT a rich country, they have a military budget that is relatively a very high percentage of their GDP. But at the same time, they are maintaining a strategic nuclear strike and second strike capability that is a close parallel to the USA, with only a fraction of the total budget of the US military budget.

When you have such lack of money, you are bound to cut short on stuff. Russian conventional forces is bound to be lacking in many aspects. And this war has shown that they are lacking the resources to conduct large scale deep penetration ground offensives. This is why I am actually NOT seeing a future mid-to-long term strengthening and increase in NATO's European major power's military budget to be used in the conventional forces to counter a large and powerful deep penetration ground offensives. Because most NATO analyst will believe that Russia don't have such capabilities that will require a huge NATO upgrade in that arena.

However, there will still be budget increase in NATO, but I think they will mostly spent it on informationization, drones, and AI/ML usage, etc. instead. Or if they (France, Germany, etc) are really aggressive, they would start investing in short, mid and intermediate range ballistic missiles.