brad465
Established Member
"Vodka drinking retreating monkeys"
Those are fair and valid points, but, given the circumstances, possibly the word "compromise " may have a relevance as time progresses.EU membership for Ukraine is going to be challenging for a few reasons. The huge grain production would break the current subsidy arrangements in the Common Agricultural Policy, and Ukraine's large population would put them over the self-imposed limit of 751 MEPs.
Of course accession to the EU takes decades anyway, so change on the EU side can happen concurrently with Ukraine harmonisation, but we don't know which nations will be negatively impacted by Ukraine's entry or how yet.
Don't think it's been the red army since the early 1990s. Although a lot of their equipment seems to date from around that time.I'm lost for words.
The mighty red army, eh?
but if (when) Putin goes he’ll almost certainly soon follow.
EU membership for Ukraine is going to be challenging for a few reasons. The huge grain production would break the current subsidy arrangements in the Common Agricultural Policy, and Ukraine's large population would put them over the self-imposed limit of 751 MEPs.
And the Wehrmacht.Tell that to Napoleon.
It's not been the Red Army since 1946.Don't think it's been the red army since the early 1990s. Although a lot of their equipment seems to date from around that time.
red as in communist is the point I was makingIt's not been the Red Army since 1946.
It was renamed the Soviet Ground Forces (less literally, the Soviet Army) as part of a move towards Soviet Nationalism instead of revolutionary fervour as the ideological basis of Soviet society.
Just picking up on this part of your post...This is what I think they’ll do. I don’t see any reason for the Ukrainians to amass a large force in Kherson ready for some kind of offensive across the Dnipro, when they could advance from the north and avoid what would probably be a blood bath. This is what I suggested may happen the other day; my only concern is that it seems almost too obvious, although having said that I’m not sure Russia could do much about it at this stage anyway.
Lukashenko tried to play both sides (and did), but eventually ran out moves and had to throw his lot in with Putin in order to stay in power. I expect that when the war is over he’ll be very quick to point out that his forces weren’t actually involved in the fighting, and that he had to let the Russians invade Ukraine via Belarus because of big nasty Vlad etc. etc. Personally I don’t think it will wash but that’s what I expect he’ll try to argue. He’s a survivor if nothing else, but if (when) Putin goes he’ll almost certainly soon follow.
I would suggest that if the Ukrainian forces can get a foothold on the left bank of the Dnipro around Kherson (maybe by arriving by barge from Mykolaiv!) then the Russian ability to resist would be severely limited. After that HIMARS could cover all of the Crimea including the Kerch bridge and the peninsula would be theirs for the taking.
Geography and the ability of the Ukrainian army to limit the effectiveness of the Russian Army by targeting its supply lines, command posts, ammunition and fuel dumps have been critical in the rolling back the Russian advance. Don't forget that the high water mark of the Russian offensive in the South was reached only 3 weeks into the 'special military operation' when the Ukrainians stopped them at Vosnesensk. The Russian army has been retreating ever since.
Because of the long land border the Russians find it considerably easier to supply their forces in the Donbas, both regular and the 'Wagner' militia, as they will do in supplying their forces in the Crimea which is essentially an island. In any event the Russian forces in the Crimea are mainly naval with a lower army presence with fewer heavy weapons (tanks, and artillery) as these were not considered necessary as a land battle was not to be expected there.
Now that the Ukrainian army is in Kherson the precision HIMARS rockets can now cover about half of the Crimean peninsula and start eliminating ammunition dumps, airfields and the like. Of the three routes into the Crimea they have essentially already cut the western one and the Kerch bridge has been damaged. This leaves only the road running along the western edge of the Sea of Azov through Novooleksilvka. I have read reports that suggest that the Russian army has already pulled back from the banks of the Dnipro near Kherson to get out of range of the Ukrainian artillery.
I would suggest that if the Ukrainian forces can get a foothold on the left bank of the Dnipro around Kherson (maybe by arriving by barge from Mykolaiv!) then the Russian ability to resist would be severely limited. After that HIMARS could cover all of the Crimea including the Kerch bridge and the peninsula would be theirs for the taking.
In the longer term this would then place the Russian forces in the Donbas in the middle of a pincer...
...but before then the cracks in the Russian leadership which are bit by bit becoming visible may develop further. Whether, worryingly, an even more extreme group takes over is in the lap of the gods.
I can't help thinking that gaining that foothold on the left bank would put Ukraine in the same kind of position as Russia was before pulling out of the right bank. Sending troops across in significant numbers is likely to be impossible for both sides, and Russia is still able to flood the area if they see Ukrainians arriving on the lower-lying left bank.Twitter is alive tonight with claims that the Kinburn Spit is being contested. I don't believe a word of it, but it shows how effective Ukrainian propaganda is online. So yes, if they can indeed gain a foothold, then I'd fully expect Russia to try and fortify Crimea as much as they can.
Dr Mike Martin has suggested that Kinburn is a diversion to allow Ukrainian forces to attack from other angles more easily. He also now thinks Ukraine will continue to fight through the winter rather than dig in, as they have the morale and momentum and Russia are in defensive mode and thus would rather not escape dug-outs, etc.Twitter is alive tonight with claims that the Kinburn Spit is being contested. I don't believe a word of it, but it shows how effective Ukrainian propaganda is online. So yes, if they can indeed gain a foothold, then I'd fully expect Russia to try and fortify Crimea as much as they can.
I have to say that the failure of the Russians to even fight for Kherson suggests that things are really, really not going well within the Russian forces. We were all expecting a bloodbath and substantial amounts of booby traps,
On unrelated news, apparently Ukraine is now fortifying the Belarusian border with mines and fences. Whatever was being planned there hasn't happened, and you have to wonder if Lukashenko didn't order the Belarusian forces to stay out of it.
The talk of Ukraine pausing over winter seemed to be coming from everywhere other than Ukraine.
Yes, I still don't understand where that talk came from. Perhaps people unfamiliar with the weather in the south of Ukraine?
Speaking of the war, it seems that what's happening in/around Bakhmut is nothing short of carnage. There are plenty of strong hints that both sides are getting annihilated there, and that Ukraine is holding out against numerically superior forces. It probably means that the Wagner convicts are being thrown into the theatre with no other purpose than as cannon fodder, but I still fear that this tactic will prove workable in the coming months.
Along with EU membership....the unintended consequence of Putin's barbarity could be he's exposed the frailties of the Russian military hitherto regarded as being potentially formidable.
And Wagner justified the action using a rip-off quote from the movie "Apocalypse Now".Hopefully the appalling execution of the alleged Wagner deserter over the weekend will massively backfire. From what I’ve seen it hasn’t been well received by anybody in Russia; it’s very difficult to argue you’re the good guys whilst at the same time doing stuff like that.
And Wagner justified the action using a rip-off quote from the movie "Apocalypse Now".
They go as far as saying that killing civilians is justified because "war is war".
That same message can be read in English at War Translated
May I recommend this Youtube video by an Australian observer ('Perun') with Slav roots on the way that institutionalised lying corrupts and destroys the effectiveness of an army. It may be found atThey have a numerical advantage in many cases, some decent kit here and there. However, command and control, logistics etc are clearly lacking. As probably is motivation in the current theatre.
Definitely not as formidable (per unit) as the force that the USSR once boasted. Kit wise they were at least able to compete with NATO and they had a lot of it. There was even talk that they had finally edged ahead when it came to airframes in the early 80s. The MiG 29 and SU27 were definitely crowd pleasers but avionics and reliability were still not up to Western standards. They did have a lot though.
Hopefully the appalling execution of the alleged Wagner deserter over the weekend will massively backfire. From what I’ve seen it hasn’t been well received by anybody in Russia; it’s very difficult to argue you’re the good guys whilst at the same time doing stuff like that.
Contrary to my predictions upthread, the ISW are suggesting that the cold hard soil will actually lead to an upswing in conflict from both sides, where both will be regrouping their forces on the aforementioned frontline.Dr Mike Martin has suggested that Kinburn is a diversion to allow Ukrainian forces to attack from other angles more easily. He also now thinks Ukraine will continue to fight through the winter rather than dig in, as they have the morale and momentum and Russia are in defensive mode and thus would rather not escape dug-outs, etc.
War has long been subject to rules that limit what forces may do. That makes a lot more sense when you consider that just war theory has always required that war have a purpose, and be limited to that purpose. Killing is not a purpose, but a necessary consequence of fighting a war. Many have confused the two.There's certainly an argument that having rules of killing people is more than a bit bizarre.
The rules of war basically boil down to "Don't kill any more people than you absolutely have to in order to achieve your objectives".There's certainly an argument that having rules of killing people is more than a bit bizarre.
Telegraph today; Zambia has asked Russia how a 23-year-old Zambian citizen in a prison in Moscow has died in Ukraine.
I'm sure that will be the answer given by Russia. It may, however, turn out that he was made an offer that he couldn't refuse.Maybe he agreed to fight for Russia and earn some brownie points and an early release?
Or an offer he didn't understand. There's been more than a few stories leaking out of enlistment papers being presented to people who can't read Russian and then being told to sign on the dotted line. Or the document being snuck into the middle of a big bundle of other documents needing a signature. And then suddenly you're in the army now...I'm sure that will be the answer given by Russia. It may, however, turn out that he was made an offer that he couldn't refuse.
Or an offer he didn't understand. There's been more than a few stories leaking out of enlistment papers being presented to people who can't read Russian and then being told to sign on the dotted line. Or the document being snuck into the middle of a big bundle of other documents needing a signature. And then suddenly you're in the army now...