MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
War on Terrorism (Politics)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 79, 80, 81 ... 106, 107, 108  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Russians have had some success taking Soledar, they did this by WW1 style infantry charges, over the top boys, using Wagner mercernaries and prisoners. This resulted in Gerasimov getting a promotion, and the Wagner lot being demoted for actually capturing a smallish town based on salt mines.

Putin doesn't want to win a dirty war, he wants to win a nice clean, special operations, SMO, using elite Russian forces that demonstrates how clever he is.

Vlad, no offence but you ain't Pep Guardiola.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Russians have had some success taking Soledar

This is a lot more significant than our Ukraine-successes-are-the-only-story media folk are letting on. This is such a slow-moving war that both sides can throw in whatever resources they please at any point and, apart from the early days, this has always meant the Ukrainians prevailing. Now, suddenly, it isn't. Take no notice of any 'this is/is not strategically important' talk. Everywhere is treated as important by these two combatants.

However this does raise the Wagner Issue. If the Russian success is only down to using Wagner forces then it is not terribly significant. There are not enough of them to do anything very much.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Russians are going to launch a spring offensive, they know that the Ukrainian army is getting new and better weapons. The Russians have lots of infantry and more artillery, yes the Ukrainians can pin-point their strikes but that's not much use against larger numbers and these zombie attacks. Providing the Empire is willing to lose, say, a quarter of a million men or so, they might still prevail and take and hold the Donbas. You don't need too many Wagner troops, as they are there behind the mobilised to ensure that the conscripts are heading towards the enemy.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

The Russians are going to launch a spring offensive

Why am I the only person in the world that is not privy to Russian war planning?

they know that the Ukranian army is getting new and better weapons.

As they have been since the first week of the war.
The Russians have lots of infantry

Actually not, it has proved to be a perennial worry for Putin.
and more artillery

Actually not, it has proved to be a perennial worry for Putin. That's why he has to do make do with drones and suchlike.

yes the Ukranians can pin point their strikes

Actually not, even the Russians aren't that incompetent.

but thats not much use against larger numbers

The Ukrainians have had the larger numbers throughout the war.

Providing the Empire is willing to lose, say a quarter of a million men or so

Losing a lot fewer in their last war, against Afghanistan, finished off the Soviet empire.

they might still prevail and take and hold the Donbas.

They held the Donbas at the start of the war, they hold the Donbas now.

You dont need too many Wagners troops, as they are there behind the mobilised, to ensure that the conscripts are heading towards the enemy.

These are called blocking troops and are traditional in all Russian military campaigns. I wouldn't trust mercenaries to do it, not if I was running a state whose chief industry is making Russians do what they may not be inclined to do.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Well I have got form for being wrong, having predicted that the Russians would not invade. They did. I predict that they will be back in spring in much larger numbers to capture the 4 areas they want to annex. I guess you are defining the Donbas to the bits that the Russian-backed separatists took over in 2014?

There are numerous definitions of the region's extent.[11] It is now most commonly defined as the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine. The historical coal mining region excluded parts of these oblasts, and included areas in Dnipropetrovsk Oblast and Southern Russia.[7] A Euroregion of the same name is composed of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in Ukraine and Rostov Oblast in Russia.[12]

I am referrring to the wider definition. These are the bits I think Putin is after.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_annexation_of_Donetsk,_Kherson,_Luhansk_and_Zaporizhzhia_oblasts#/media/File:Ukraine_disputed_regions.svg
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I agree with all this, I just didn't think it needed spelling out. Just to be clear:

1. These are 'oblasts' created for purely administrative reasons during Soviet times. They have no cultural or historical specificity.
2. Although generally 'Russian' they were awarded to Ukraine for political reasons in the 1950's.
3. They have distorted all independent Ukraine's elections because while the predominantly Ukrainian areas split the vote between more or less pro- and anti-Russian parties, the two oblasts overwhelmingly voted for the most pro-Russian party. And will continue to distort Ukrainian elections so as long as they are part of Ukraine. (cf the Irish nationalists in the British parliament 1880-1921)
4. When the predominantly Ukrainian parts got fed up with their overly pro-Russian governments brought about by this ludicrous arrangement, they rose up against their democratically-elected government.
5. The Russians in the two oblasts (and Russia) were outraged by this and declared their independence.
6. The Ukrainians were outraged by this and invaded the two oblasts.
7. The Russian oblast citizens (and Russia) were outraged by this and fought back.
8. The war ended with the Minsk Accords leaving most of the two oblasts in 'Russian' hands, but parts not.
9. Nobody was happy with this and carried on shelling each other across the cease-fire line.
10. Until the Russians invaded... now read on.
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

There is a lot of the Ukranians are "over claiming" the number of Russian battlefield casualties, last figure 126,650 Russian battle casualty deaths.

Wiley looks at it the other way round, it is the the Russians, not the Ukrainians, who have actually overstated their deaths and wounded (last time this was at 11k), so let us (for experimental purposes) envisage they actually have not suffered any casualties at all. This would leave the Russians with the 190K they started, the 130K conscription uptake, and the 300K they mobilised, giving 620K now in the field (or being rotated). Yet there were rumours that Russia in fact mobilised more (do you believe that Putin would exaggerate or under-exaggerate the mobilisation figure...or tell the truth?). The Russians had an estimated 2 million armed forces reserve before the war.

Wiley would not be surprised that there was now a million plus Russian soldiers in Ukraine or on the borders. Can Russia train, equip and supply that number?
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I take the view that all the figures are way out (and not necessarily mendaciously either). But they are unimportant because

1. Both sides have enough forces to fight the war indefinitely
2. Neither side have enough forces to win the war decisively.

Probably the best analogy is the American Civil War.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Be brave, mon amis!

Of course, both sides have their own versions of the Iraqi Minister of Information (and we've got Boris Johnson), and all claims of Killed In Action (KIA) from both sides are, technically speaking, a load of bollocks.

e.g. Ukrainian claims of Russian KIA’s continue to increase, almost exponentially.

Jun-22 5,100
Jul-22 5,230
Aug-22 7,070
Sep-22 11,180
Oct-22 12,740
Nov-22 17,060
Dec-22 17,080
Jan-23 21,526

Considering the length of the front and the number, quality (training) and equipment of the Ukrainian forces, it is (if believed) a proportionately higher rate of casualties than the Wehrmacht inflicted on the Red Army in WW2.

As for all the Wunderwaffe, we (NATO) are promising the Ukraine:

Friends in the Tidworth area tell me that the 14 Challenger 2's are coming from the UK "spare parts" stockpile, already marked as obsolete while the Army bids to get funding for a Challenger 3.

Here are the lucky customers cheerfully arriving in the UK.
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/ukrainian-crews-arrive-in-the-uk-to-train-on-british-tanks/

After a few rounds of "you first, no, after you", the US has "committed" to sending some M1 Abrams tanks. But not from existing stock (oh no) - they have - for some strange reason - to be brand new tanks. So the "commitment" is to placing an order with the factory to build some brand new tanks, now due for delivery in "about 12 months".

For Ukraine the real goal is likely to be to get their hands on large numbers of Leopard 2 tanks. But which version? The really-good latest-model with all the best anti-anti-tank missile protection is the 2A7 model. Is that the version? Err, no, it's from the stockpile of older models like the 2A4 and 2A5. Like the ones sold to Turkey and used in Syria, that proved as useful as chocolate teapots when things got hot. Vulnerable to both missiles and IEDs.

So the Ukrainians might get a few of the oldest spare-parts models. But they might have to reassemble the parts. And, if they’re lucky, all the parts will be for the same models. Otherwise it might turn into a Johnny Cash Cadillac tank ( “One Piece At A Time”)
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

For all AEL armchair generals, I offer the Military Land Deployment maps. From a website sympathetic to the Ukrainians.

Here
https://militaryland.net/maps/deployment-map/
for the current situation and where specific units are claimed to be deployed. "Claimed" being a big operative word, with truth being one of the first casualties etc

From the home page are links to older status reports, which give a better idea of how events are unfolding.
e.g.
https://militaryland.net/news/invasion-day-344-summary/

One might have to take "today's" positional claims with a large pinch of salt, but by comparing the claimed positions and maps over time, one might actually get a fairly good impression of which way the front line is moving. Or how fast it's heading west.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Did the people at Tidworth tell you why only the Omanis ever bought a Challenger-2?
Send private message
Wile E. Coyote


In: Arizona
View user's profile
Reply with quote

There is a lot of good work war mapping, but you do have to keep in mind that, when the Ukranians arrive to retake areas, eg Kherson (that is the city, not the region), they arrived to discover that a Russian army, that was thought encircled, had already retreated, along with most of their equipment, to the opposite side of the river. OK, the last few left to destroy infrastructure were caught, but they had evacuated 30,000 without folks noticing.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Mick Harper wrote:
Did the people at Tidworth tell you why only the Omanis ever bought a Challenger-2?


I am proceeding with enquiries in an orderly direction.
Send private message
Boreades


In: finity and beyond
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Preliminary enquires (m'lud) suggest that the devious German, French and American governments helped to sell their vehicles by offering better "inducements" than the Brits could come up with. How unsporting.

Oman being a special case because we somehow basically own the whole army. Or perhaps it was because it was us that "helped" in the 1970 Coup
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhofar_Rebellion

I have it on dubious authority that Greece was in talks to buy Challenger 2's. But as part of the deal, they wanted the Elgin Marbles back. UK Gov, fearing the precedent and a thin end of a very long "who really owns all those historical artifacts" wedge, baulked on the deal. So the Greeks said "blow that for a game of tank soldiers" and went and bought Leopards instead.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

M J Harper in Revisionist Historiography wrote:
He chairs the British Committee for the Reunification of the Parthenon Marbles so we know his heart is in the right place. It is high time the Parthenon was taken out of irresponsible Greek hands and relocated to London.
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 79, 80, 81 ... 106, 107, 108  Next

Jump to:  
Page 80 of 108

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group