Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[King Zultan]

Wonder when we're gonna get to the point where there's one rifle to three Russians, but they continue to fight despite this.

[Loud Whispers]

LW, I remember those posts of Murz's, from back when he was blogging them - which was a year ago. The point here is that the russians of today are not the russians from back then (fuck it, I'm not capitalising that).
A year ago they were still scrambling to damage control after they found themselves fighting a different war than the one they were prepared for. Now they've settled for what looks like a sustainable routine that they can keep eroding the defenders' with for years to come.
So what if they claw their way in a dog park or a coke plant at a time - they're still advancing and they're currently at little risk of ever losing what they gain. Barring sudden implosion for reasons as of today not apparent, or the West stopping patting themselves on their backs for how much they've already done, and getting their shit together.
If by 2025 or even 2030 there's russian army at the whole length of the Dnipro line that may or may not be enough of a victory for them, but it certainly won't be much of one for the Ukrainians.

The main point is not that we can all fall asleep because Russia's military is dead. The main point is that they've had years to adapt and learn from their failures, and yet they are still doing the exact same thing as when they started the war: using their superior numbers to attack wherever Ukraine is strongest, in order to capture another fortified rubbish dump or coke plant. Whereas Ukrainian military objectives target Russian ability to wage war, Russian military objectives target lines on a map that do not affect Ukraine's ability to fight. Ukraine will blow up bridges on the Syvash or artillery depots, strike barracks full of troops, railway lines or supply depots, target Russian artillery whilst the Russians continue to give medals to their officers whenever they make a new mini-Verdun.

Imagine the kind of havoc Russia could cause if instead of throwing away their men to achieve nothing, they had multiple brigades of organised and trained veterans ready to conduct offensives that threatened to bypass and encircle these fortified villages. Of all outcomes, the one where Russia just decides to go home is the best. Failing that, the next best outcome is the Russian military choosing to prioritise targets where the Ukrainians are well-prepared and can afford to lose. Especially since if the plan is to win a war of attrition against the American military industrial complex, Putin deserves to have a fat McClown following him everywhere shouting "you dumb motherfucker" day and night. It's the futility of it all which makes it so grim. It's like Vuhledar and Pavlivka seeing the near total destruction of their marines. Fast forward a year and the Russians are doing it again.

It does not make sense to assault a well-prepared, well-defended enemy, for the express purpose of capturing an objective which does not change anything. If tomorrow, Avdiivka fell. Another Russian general would get a medal and send the survivors to go turn Lastochkyne into another mini-Verdun. If the Ukrainians broke through Pavlivka and captured Mariupol, it could end the war. Why doesn't Russia even try to win the war? Same reasons why they're arming rosgvardia with heavy weapons.

Before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, the Army produced around 14,000 155mm rounds a month in government-owned, contractor-operated munitions plants. In  December 2022, Army Secretary Christine Wormuth said the Army was looking to increase production to 20,000 rounds per month by the spring and 40,000 rounds per month by 2025.
Last March, Army Undersecretary Gabe Camarillo upped the target slightly, announcing plans to produce 24,000 rounds a month by year’s end.

The Army hit the target early, then exceeded it, producing 28,000 shells in October. At least some of those shells went right out the door to Ukraine, Army acquisition secretary Doug Bush told reporters in a media roundtable in November. He declined to say just how many.

Bush said the service now aims to boost its monthly production to 36,000 by March, 60,000 by September, 70,000 to 80,000 in early 2025, and 100,000 by the end of calendar 2025 — two and half times more than Wormuth’s year-old goal.
As part of this push, the Army has added shifts, bought robots, and expanded its ammunition plants, Bush said. 

The Army’s investment has also been inexpensive relative to other Army programs, where $3 million can be considered a cheap price for certain advanced weapons, like hypersonic missiles.
The Army funded its original planned increase from 14,000 to 24,000 shells with $1.45 billion. In November, it announced a further $1.5 billion.

The greatest risk for Ukraine remains political, because otherwise time is on their side. As much as Russia improves and recovers from its initial blunders, the relative gap in strength between it and Ukraine decreases.

[Il Palazzo]

^ I think that's too rose-tinted a view of the situation. Like, most of those things you say the russian's don't target, they definitely do. Many of the faults of the russian military you describe can be also applied to the defenders. And there's definitely room to argue about how the gap changes.
But I think trying to convince you otherwise would be playing too much into the hands of russian propaganda, amplifying their message du jour. And hell, who's to say I'm not suffering from its distortions myself. So I shan't. I'd just urge everyone not to grow complacent with how things are.

[Loud Whispers]

^ I think that's too rose-tinted a view of the situation. Like, most of those things you say the russian's don't target, they definitely do. Many of the faults of the russian military you describe can be also applied to the defenders. And there's definitely room to argue about how the gap changes.
But I think trying to convince you otherwise would be playing too much into the hands of russian propaganda, amplifying their message du jour. And hell, who's to say I'm not suffering from its distortions myself. So I shan't. I'd just urge everyone not to grow complacent with how things are.

Well I don't think you're wrong, I also maintain that Russia wasting its most modern equipment and swathes of manpower attacking exactly where Ukraine expects them to is the best of all worse outcomes

Most of the losses occurred in the first month of the Avdiivka battle starting in early October. After a few weeks, desperate Russian commanders switched up their tactics, and sent in the infantry on foot.
The vehicle toll “surpasses Russian losses in any other single battle,” Frontelligence reported, “making it the most devastating battle for Russian forces in terms of vehicle losses.”

Losing at least 211 vehicles and 13,000 soldiers killed and wounded amounts to the “complete annihilation of five battalions,” according to Frontelligence. “This represents significant losses in both equipment and personnel, considering the achieved results.”
The roughly dozen regiments and brigades the Kremlin has staged around Avdiivka have advanced a mile or so north and south of the city but haven’t made inroads into the city itself—or cut off its main supply lines.

I really can't say I disagree with you at all, especially in regards to complacency. The EU has been lagging behind non-stop and the USA is getting distracted with election season coming up. But I don't think this is a rosy-tinted view on Russian military strength (which is still considerable, and its artillery production is still immensely superior in quantity). It's more the belief that the biggest threat to Ukraine is EU/USA losing interest, or continuing to adopt a policy of "supply the bare minimum needed for Ukraine to survive, not win." Either of which could allow Russia to actually force Ukraine on the defensive.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, expressed three wishes last month: he sought $61.4bn in funding from Washington for Ukraine’s war effort next year, $20.5bn from the European Union, and an EU invitation to start membership talks.
Zelenskyy asked for his wishes to come true before Christmas, but it now seems possible he will not get any of them.

On Monday, the director of the Office of Management and Budget at the White House wrote to Congress, saying 97 percent of approved funding for Ukraine had been spent.
“I want to be clear: without congressional action, by the end of the year we will run out of resources to procure more weapons and equipment for Ukraine and to provide equipment from US military stocks,” Shalanda D Young wrote in her letter.

“There is no magical pot of funding available to meet this moment. We are out of money – and nearly out of time.”
Cutting funding would “kneecap” Ukraine, putting its forces on the defensive and possibly on the retreat, Young wrote.

[Strongpoint]

Wonder when we're gonna get to the point where there's one rifle to three Russians, but they continue to fight despite this.

Never. Russian defense industry is growing and ramping up its production. They also have money to import stuff.

[EuchreJack]

Wonder when we're gonna get to the point where there's one rifle to three Russians, but they continue to fight despite this.

Never. Russian defense industry is growing and ramping up its production. They also have money to import stuff.

Not really?

They're more borrowing/bartering than buying. It's not sustainable.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/11/21/why-the-russian-economys-luck-is-running-out-a83165

[Strongpoint]

Wonder when we're gonna get to the point where there's one rifle to three Russians, but they continue to fight despite this.

Never. Russian defense industry is growing and ramping up its production. They also have money to import stuff.

Not really?

They're more borrowing/bartering than buying. It's not sustainable.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/11/21/why-the-russian-economys-luck-is-running-out-a83165

Yeah, hard times are ahead for Russian education, healthcare, etc. But they'll have money for war.

It is like an old Russian joke:

"Daddy! Prices for vodka went up! Does it mean you'll drink less?"
"No, son. It means you'll eat less"

[King Zultan]

Wonder when we're gonna get to the point where there's one rifle to three Russians, but they continue to fight despite this.

Never. Russian defense industry is growing and ramping up its production. They also have money to import stuff.

Not really?

They're more borrowing/bartering than buying. It's not sustainable.
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/11/21/why-the-russian-economys-luck-is-running-out-a83165

Yeah, hard times are ahead for Russian education, healthcare, etc. But they'll have money for war.

It is like an old Russian joke:

"Daddy! Prices for vodka went up! Does it mean you'll drink less?"
"No, son. It means you'll eat less"

Russian priorities right there.

[Strongpoint]

Russia launched 110 missiles at us this night\morning. I guess they are really mad after we destroyed their warship a few days ago.

[Loud Whispers]

Russia launched 110 missiles at us this night\morning. I guess they are really mad after we destroyed their warship a few days ago.

At least 31 dead, 160+ injured with a missile also entering Poland's airspace. I wonder what "threshold" Russia would have to cross before NATO chiefs decided WWIII was an acceptable risk

[Ganondworf]

A mere violation of NATO airspace is far away from that treshold, I'm sure.

These days I feel even more helpless and outraged at the lack of adequate support for Ukraine. It feels like NATO administrations try to get away with the bare minimum of support that just prevents Ukraine from losing. But raising that support to enable Ukraine to push the russians back out, let alone winning that damn war, seems to be not very high on their agendas. Maybe not even desired?

Why are we letting russia get away with an invasion like that?

[Maximum Spin]

Why are we letting russia get away with an invasion like that?

Because they still own the marginal barrel of oil which Europe still indirectly buys and burns.

[Strongpoint]

Why are we letting russia get away with an invasion like that?

Because some Western politicians (in a broader sense, including business, political movements, the public - everyone who influences what countries do) directly profit from business with Russia and\or the ongoing war.

Some - afraid of escalation and ready to sacrifice Ukraine in hope to avoid a war at home

Some - afraid of Russia losing and breaking up into several extremist countries... with ICBM nukes

Some - Cynically understand how cost-efficient an ongoing war in Ukraine is in damaging Russian military potential while most of the cost is paid by Ukrainian lives.

Some - Actually like Russia and Putin and want their countries to be like that

Some - Happy to see Ukrainian industry and agriculture being damaged\destroyed because it eliminates a competitor.

Some - drool at young white European refugees as a source of a cheap workforce with far fewer problems in cultural adaptation

And so on.

World is a cynical and cold place. Overall political will of the West, a sum of smaller political desires, is not even close to "Russia must be defeated ASAP"

_____________

Saying all that, don't think that I am not grateful for the genuine help we do get. I'd love to see more, much more. I'd also love to see way harsher sanctions against Russia. But it is not how the world works

[Loud Whispers]

Because some Western politicians (in a broader sense, including business, political movements, the public - everyone who influences what countries do) directly profit from business with Russia and\or the ongoing war.

Also more directly, lots of Western politicians were/are funded by Russian oligarchs, or lobbied by accountants/lawyers/bankers who are friends thereof

[scriver]

I'm not, and I'm going to spend these millions of dollars I found in a suit case in a subway storage locker completely by accident to convince you of it