Ukraine War Watch Thread

[wjfox]

[ººº]

At best someone from Putin's party or ally will take his place. No civil war or Navalny in office (which could trigger one if it happened).
I don't see Russia breaking up anytime soon. Same with USA or China, they're militarily too strong and would probably count with public and foreign support to reverse it immediately.

[ibm9000]

The breakup of Russia would benefit Europe and should be the aim of EU policymakers.

I guess that is our "Higher Moral Standards" speaking again, destroying a country for our own selfish interests.

[ibm9000]

As Russian forces move closer to capturing the embattled Donetsk city of Bakhmut, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Moscow has launched its long-anticipated offensive.

Is that how Ukraine is winning the war, by having cities taken by the enemy?

This new Russian offensive “just highlights the importance of timing,” Stoltenberg said. "It's urgent to provide Ukraine with more weapons, the faster we can deliver weapons, ammunition, spare parts fuel to the Ukrainian front, the more lives we save, and the better we support efforts to find a peaceful, negotiated solution to this conflict.”

Maybe NATO should provide Russia with weapons to save even more lives.

Or, it could be something like: Zelensky, if you don't enter serious negotiations now, we will reduce the amount of ammo delivered; in one month, we will cut it in half. Of course, only if NATO wants peace.

[weatheriscool]

Russia has lost "strategically, operationally" one year after its invasion of Ukraine, top US general says
https://www.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ru ... 12354b705d
From CNN's Haley Britzky

A little less than a year since Moscow began its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has “lost strategically, operationally, and tactically,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark Milley said from Brussels on Tuesday.

[wjfox]

Wallace: 97% of entire Russian army in Ukraine

Posted at 8:23

We're hearing from UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace again now, who is in Brussels for today's Nato meeting on how the military alliance can further help Ukraine.

He begins by discussing Moscow's offensive strategy, saying that Russia has not been able to amass a single force "to punch through" Ukraine's defences. Rather, "we've just seen an effort to advance".

He tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "That has come at a huge cost to the Russian army. We now estimate 97% of the Russian army, the whole Russian army, is in Ukraine."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-e ... type=share

[ibm9000]

Russia has “lost strategically, operationally, and tactically

Strategy: Ukraine is not a NATO member and there is a Rostov-Sevastopol land corridor.
Campaigns: The Russian army was running all over Ukraine and then decided to abandon a good par of it. More information in History books, after the end of the war.
Tactics: Running all over the country and still gaining ground. More information in History books, after the end of the war.

We now estimate 97% of the Russian army, the whole Russian army, is in Ukraine.

Something like 970.000 soldiers, really?

Russia has not been able to amass a single force "to punch through" Ukraine's defences. Rather, "we've just seen an effort to advance".

Maybe Russia doesn't want to punch through (again) and is happy with a grinding machine.

When did US lose the Vietnam War, before starting or 5' before flying away from the Embassy?

[ibm9000]

What if Ukraine Lost the War but the Western Media Didn’t Notice?
Douglas Macgregor, Col. (ret.), former advisor to the Secretary of Defense in the Donald Trump administration. (I guess this counts against him, like against any Bush's advisor... or Reagan's... or Nixon... or...). He has a very strong opinion about our war in Ukraine and about our (total rubbish) western propaganda.
Maybe Ukraine has suffered 600.000 casualties; maybe Russia is not and never was running out of shells; maybe Russia dispatched a lot of the Ukrainian equipment and standing army in the initial phase of the war; maybe Ukraine has to sell a continuous string of victories to keep our money and weapons coming; maybe the sudden rise in Russian casualties is because Bakhmut is going to fall... maybe we are selling the WMD again; (or the Maine or the Gulf of Tonkin incident).

For years, the United States had been turning Ukraine into a base for strikes on Russia, and Moscow had no other choice but to respond. The US media (only?) has "systematically misinformed" the American public about events in eastern Europe and portrayed Russia’s special operation as an "unprovoked attack" on Ukraine. (Cuba?).
Russian forces west of Izium numbered less than 2,000 light troops. The price for Kiev’s propaganda victory was an estimated 5,000 to 10,000 casualties in a flat, open area under Russian artillery.
Reinforcing Failure. What does Ukraine actually needs to recover those 100.000 sq km?
As long as Washington delivers cash, military assistance, and equipment to Ukraine, Kiev will fight its unwinnable war, and Washington’s ruling political class will profit from the transfer of cash to the Pentagon and the U.S. Defense Industrial Base. (Indochina?).
Kiev’s war with Moscow is lost. Ukrainian forces are being bled white. Trained replacements do not exist in sufficient numbers to influence the battle, and the situation grows more desperate by the hour. No amount of U.S. and allied military aid or assistance short of direct military intervention by U.S. and NATO ground forces can change this harsh reality. (So, WW3).
Ground-combat forces that immobilize soldiers in prepared defenses will be identified, targeted, and destroyed from a distance. When persistent overhead intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets, whether manned or unmanned, are linked to precision guided-strike weapons or modern artillery systems informed by accurate targeting data, “holding ground” is fatal to any ground force. This is all the more true in Ukraine, because it was apparent from the first action that Moscow focused on the destruction of Ukrainian forces, not on the occupation of cities or the capture of Ukrainian territory west of the Dnieper River.
Moscow can no more lose the war with Ukraine than Washington could lose a war with Mexico. (NATO -US, actually- can keep that war going for... [1946-1973/5] 20 years, 50?)

It is far more likely that countries in Europe, Asia, and Africa will either bypass sanctions to buy discounted Russian and Belorussian commodities or simply refuse to enforce them. (Napoleon tried the Continental System).
China, India, and Saudi Arabia are introducing de-dollarization policies as an anti-sanction measure. Saudi Arabia’s offer to sell oil in Chinese yuan raises real questions about the future of the petrodollar.
Why should the United States commit to war with China over Taiwan? Would the Chinese attack the United States over Cuba? (Who says it's inevitable?, why? In Indochina, France wanted its colony back, a noble cause, but... Vietnam?).

D. Mcgregor.

It seems that the Abrams training is starting now. So, in 16 weeks, 20, plus another 2 in Ukraine or 4?

A Russian BMD-2 and BTR-D seen firing wildly into the Forest presumably at Ukrainian Defensive Positions near the City of Kreminna.

"Firing wildly" is what the Americans call "gaining fire superiority". (Siesta, power nap).

[ººº]

What if Ukraine Lost the War but the Western Media Didn’t Notice?

It all depends on how each side spins it.
What is undeniable is that Russia occupies eastern Ukraine and I see it very difficult for Ukraine to recuperate it without direct support from NATO.

[caltrek]

What if Ukraine Lost the War but the Western Media Didn’t Notice?

It all depends on how each side spins it.
What is undeniable is that Russia occupies eastern Ukraine and I see it very difficult for Ukraine to recuperate it without direct support from NATO.

What is also undeniable is that Russia has failed to capture anything else, including for example Kiev. Sure, we don't know what was inside Putin's head when he launched his initial strike, but it is hard to believe things are going according to plan. I think even Western Media sources would notice if Russia took over Kiev and points west of there.

Yes, NATO support does seem to be important. Something both sides seem to agree upon.

[caltrek]

Front Lines ‘Quite Stable’ Top U.S. General Says
by Howard Altman
February 14, 2023

Introduction:

(The Drive) There is bloody fighting going on as Russia has unleashed its offensive in the Donbas, but little has changed across the battlefield, Army Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday.

“This offensive you see going on right now [is] generally in the Bakhmut area,” Milley told reporters during a press conference after the ninth Ukraine Defense Contact Group meeting wrapped up in Brussels, Belgium. “From Kharkiv all the way down to Kherson, the front line is quite stable, even though very violent.”

“Most of the dynamic movement back and forth is generally in the vicinity of Bakhmut,” Milley added. “The Ukrainians are holding. They’re fighting the defense.”

(See linked article for Twitter feeds and photographs).

The Russians, he said, “primarily the Wagner group, are attacking but there's a what I would describe as a really a very significant grinding battle of attrition with very high casualties, especially on the Russian side. There's no fancy arts of maneuver going on here. This is frontal attacks. Wave attacks. Lots of artillery with extremely high levels of casualties in that particular area.”

How long the fighting in Bakhmut will last, said Milley, “is difficult to say actually, it's been going on for weeks, and I think it will continue to go on until the Russians culminate. I don't think the Ukrainians will just collapse or fold. I think they're gonna continue to fight.”

Read more here: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ ... eral-says

[ibm9000]

What is also undeniable...

Russia did not attempt to take Kiev. (But it would have been quite happy to occupy it. Russia did capture Kherson and abandoned it; both undeniable).
Marengo: Things never go according to plan.

[caltrek]

What is also undeniable...

Russia did not attempt to take Kiev. (But it would have been quite happy to occupy it. Russia did capture Kherson and abandoned it; both undeniable).
Marengo: Things never go according to plan.

Sure, that long column of military vehicles we saw heading to Kiev was just a site seeing tour. Darn tourist maps were to blame.

[ibm9000]

Sure, that long column...

...it would have been quite happy to occupy it.

[ibm9000]

Aim before you fire, West warns Ukraine.

The Daily Telegraph.

Basic training?

[wjfox]

...it would have been quite happy to occupy it.

From a moral standpoint, what's the difference?

[ibm9000]

Moral?

I am talking from a military point of view. Who cares about morals?

The breakup of Russia would benefit Europe and should be the aim of EU policymakers.

[ibm9000]

By this spring -two invasions later- after some 9.000 more Americans and several hundred thousand Indochinese had died, I could only regret that I had not, at the same time, revealed this history to the American people through the newspapers.

D. Ellsberg.

I wonder what we will learn about our "morals" in this war in a year or two.

[wjfox]

Moral?

I am talking from a military point of view. Who cares about morals?

The breakup of Russia would benefit Europe and should be the aim of EU policymakers.

Who started this war? Who sent tanks and troops into Ukraine and towards Kiev? Why are people suggesting the breakup of Russia, not Turkey or some other place like Kazakhstan? What on earth could have prompted them to say this?

[ibm9000]

For years, the United States had been turning Ukraine into a base for strikes on Russia, and Moscow had no other choice but to respond. The US media has "systematically misinformed" the American public about events in eastern Europe and portrayed Russia’s special operation as an "unprovoked attack" on Ukraine.

The United States started this war, according to that American col.