Russian Ukrainian War

[WW2historian]

I thought the Kyiv independent and other Ukrainian sources bullshitted a lot, but apparently not as much as the Washington military think tank the ISW. Ukraine says about 800,000 Russians have been killed and wounded, but the ISW says it's anywhere from about 1 to 1.6 million. This war has lasted 36 month and they say Russian losses are 30 to 45k a month? 36x45000= 1,620,000 That's laughable.
" — whether intended to increase the current grouping or rotate out existing forces — is likely intended to sustain Russia’s tempo of operations despite heavy losses of about 30,000 - 45,000 causalities (combined killed and wounded) per month.[10] "

Institute for the Study of War

The Kremlin has launched an information operation that seeks to create the false impression that the Russian economy is performing well despite numerous continued indicators of macroeconomic distress.

www.understandingwar.org

 

[GaudaNaresh]

"Own Crimea=win" There is no doubt about that. The Germans had Crimea cut off (but not on the sea) and also had stronger army and the best General in WW2, Manstein in charge of taking Crimea. However they had a bitch of a time taking Crimea. Although they eventually took it, I believe it was a Pyrrhic and weakened Germany. To take Crimea and hold it, the Germans needed to first fully concentrate on taking the oil fields in the Caucasus because that would've cut off Crimea mostly for resupply from the sea. That would've made it easier to take Crimea without huge losses. The fact that the idiot Ukrainians tried to take Crimea showed just how frigging stupid they are.

Taking crimea by land is also a big problem - the 'neck' of crimea, where Crimea joins the Eurasian mainland, is a swampy, marshy mess of a land. Good luck moving armor through that terrain.

 

[WW2historian]

Taking crimea by land is also a big problem - the 'neck' of crimea, where Crimea joins the Eurasian mainland, is a swampy, marshy mess of a land. Good luck moving armor through that terrain.

NATO current troop strength is about 3.5 million. I believe NATO would suffer 100% causalities trying to take Crimea, and that's without any nukes being used.

 

[GaudaNaresh]

NATO current troop strength is about 3.5 million. I believe NATO would suffer 100% causalities trying to take Crimea, and that's without any nukes being used.

i dunno what their actual casualty rate of crimea would be, but crimea in my view, is the largest fortress on the planet with the same damn issues of a fortress : it has finite supplies. Crimea lacks water.
The landscape of Crimea is a steppe bounded by steep cliffs and narrow coast on the West & South, the the north and east being mostly the marshy,swampy mess of a connector to Eurasia.
If Crimea is very hard to get into (provided crimea is armed to the teeth), Crimea is also easy to starve out, provided you threaten its northern neck, because that is where its water comes from, from the Dneiper. Therefore, Russian land-bridge to Crimea connecting Dnieper is a *MUST* if crimea is to hold indefinitely.

As long as this neck connection is in Russian control, Crimea is impregnable : You cannot take it from the sea, its only northern route is blocked AND crimea has enough water to never be thirsted out.

This may also have been the ultimate objective of the failed/feinted Russian thrust at Kiev : to draw enough Ukrainian troops to the Kiev front that the Crimea front got weakened - the Ukros are not stoopid enough to directly weaken front with Russia itself or worse, Donbass ceasefire line. Yet, the deployed troops had to come from somewhere and that somewhere was southern Ukraine front with Crimea.

The parts of Kherson + Zapho that Russia currently holds, comes from Crimean peninsula breakout, not Donbass breakout in the south via Mariuopol ( i think they met in melitopol or something).


That is the only thing that makes sense of the Russian thrust to Kiev not being a failed game-ender move: to pull troops to Kiev to cause Crimean breakout, turning Crimea from a super-fortress of limited water to impregnable super-fortress with infinite water.

 

[Blademaster]

i dunno what their actual casualty rate of crimea would be, but crimea in my view, is the largest fortress on the planet with the same damn issues of a fortress : it has finite supplies. Crimea lacks water.
The landscape of Crimea is a steppe bounded by steep cliffs and narrow coast on the West & South, the the north and east being mostly the marshy,swampy mess of a connector to Eurasia.
If Crimea is very hard to get into (provided crimea is armed to the teeth), Crimea is also easy to starve out, provided you threaten its northern neck, because that is where its water comes from, from the Dneiper. Therefore, Russian land-bridge to Crimea connecting Dnieper is a *MUST* if crimea is to hold indefinitely.

As long as this neck connection is in Russian control, Crimea is impregnable : You cannot take it from the sea, its only northern route is blocked AND crimea has enough water to never be thirsted out.

This may also have been the ultimate objective of the failed/feinted Russian thrust at Kiev : to draw enough Ukrainian troops to the Kiev front that the Crimea front got weakened - the Ukros are not stoopid enough to directly weaken front with Russia itself or worse, Donbass ceasefire line. Yet, the deployed troops had to come from somewhere and that somewhere was southern Ukraine front with Crimea.

The parts of Kherson + Zapho that Russia currently holds, comes from Crimean peninsula breakout, not Donbass breakout in the south via Mariuopol ( i think they met in melitopol or something).


That is the only thing that makes sense of the Russian thrust to Kiev not being a failed game-ender move: to pull troops to Kiev to cause Crimean breakout, turning Crimea from a super-fortress of limited water to impregnable super-fortress with infinite water.

I disagree. Kiev was the center of gravity. Once Kiev was taken the support for Ukraine would have fallen apart and the political resistance would have melt away and allow Russia greater control over Ukraine with less cost.

 

[Soldier35]

Footage of the fall of a Russian Su-25 attack aircraft near the village of Zaitsevo in Donbass. According to Ukrainian media, the plane was shot down by a Ukrainian MANPADS. But when watching the video, you can notice inconsistencies: when the missile was launched from the MANPADS, the sky was covered with clouds, while at the time of the fall of the Su-25, the sky was clear. Also in the video, the flying plane catches fire before the MANPADS missile is launched. Perhaps the video used associative footage, but the launch of the MANPADS missile is shown from another episode of the battle. A search and rescue team was sent to the site of the Su-25 crash on an Mi-8 helicopter, which was covered by an Mi-35 helicopter. At the time of the evacuation of the pilot, the Russian Mi-8 helicopter was attacked by three Ukrainian FPV drones, judging by the video, the Ukrainian drones were unable to hit the helicopter and the pilot was evacuated.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIQlgu6eP6w

 

[Soldier35]

An episode of Russian special forces snipers at work in the Kremensky forest. There is no actual battle, the group is waiting for the return of three scouts who went ahead to reconnoiter Ukrainian positions. Judging by the video, the scouts started the battle, after which they retreated to the positions of the main group, shown at the end of the video. A Ukrainian mortar fired at the scouts. As a result of the battle, one scout was wounded, at the end the group presumably went on the attack, the video is shortened.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8u80gFMc20

 

[WW2historian]

I disagree. Kiev was the center of gravity. Once Kiev was taken the support for Ukraine would have fallen apart and the political resistance would have melt away and allow Russia greater control over Ukraine with less cost.

I've been back and forth on that and although taking Kiev would have been great, it would have been very costly for Russia if Ukraine decided to fight to the last. The other problem was they could have moved the capital further west. Napoleon did take Moscow and it was fatal. However that is not the greatest example to compare with what's going on today. The safer bet was to create a land bridge to Crimea, take Mariupol, and destroy the Azovs, and they accomplished all three of those goals. I think patience has paid off well for Putin.

 

[Soldier35]

Footage of the attack of Russian modified FPV drones VT-40 Sudoplatov, controlled via fiber optic cable, on the Ukrainian IFV AIFV-B-C25. The AIFV-B-C25 infantry fighting vehicle is based on the M113A1 armored personnel carrier. The AIFV-B-C25 IFV was produced in Belgium, developed in 1979. One of the armament options of the AIFV-B-C25 IFV is a 25-mm Oerlikon KBA cannon paired with a 7.62-mm FN MAG machine gun. These IFVs were previously used by the Ukrainian 15th Mechanized Brigade "Steel Cordon". The Ukrainian IFVs were hidden in a hangar in the village of Kolodeznoye, in the Kupyansk direction. A Ukrainian armored car Roshel Senator was also stored there, they are produced in Canada. Judging by the video, all the equipment was destroyed by drones.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlbszDL0UQA

 

[WW2historian]

Tucker Carlson has planted a seed of death for Ukraine and Zelensky. Lets first see if it will sprout before we think it will grow to full size.

"Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukraine Of Selling U.S. Military Aid To Mexican Drug Cartels | Watch​

Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukraine Of Selling U.S. Military Aid To Mexican Drug Cartels | Watch

Tucker Carlson, a prominent Trump supporter, has accused Ukraine of selling U.S. military aid to Mexican drug cartels. In an explosive interview, Carlson claimed up to half of the weapons sent to Ukraine end up on black markets, fueling criminal activities. He labeled the situation a "crime" and...

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

 

[WW2historian]

Tucker Carlson has planted a seed of death for Ukraine and Zelensky. Lets first see if it will sprout before we think it will grow to full size.

"Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukraine Of Selling U.S. Military Aid To Mexican Drug Cartels | Watch​

Tucker Carlson Accuses Ukraine Of Selling U.S. Military Aid To Mexican Drug Cartels | Watch

Tucker Carlson, a prominent Trump supporter, has accused Ukraine of selling U.S. military aid to Mexican drug cartels. In an explosive interview, Carlson claimed up to half of the weapons sent to Ukraine end up on black markets, fueling criminal activities. He labeled the situation a "crime" and...

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It's getting attention from India and now the Russian news outlet "TASS" has an article on it.

Ukrainian army selling US weapons to Mexican cartels, Tucker Carlson says

Earlier, Carlson said that "the Ukrainian military is selling about half of the arms they get from the United States into international black markets

tass.com

 

[Soldier35]

Ukrainian servicemen witnessed the impact of a Russian ODAB-500 bomb equipped with a UMPK module. The video is rare and archival, the location of the shooting is not reported, the bomb was presumably dropped by a Su-34NVO aircraft, the bomb exploded over the target. The ODAB-500 bomb was developed by GNPP Bazalt in the late 1980s, it contains ethylene oxide or piperylene, depending on the version. There are 4 versions of bombs in total: ODAB-500, ODAB-500P, ODAB-500PM and ODAB-500PMV. The damaging factor of the ODAB-500 bomb is a blast wave with a pressure of up to 120 atmospheres and thermal radiation of up to 2000 degrees, some call the bomb a vacuum bomb. The radius of destruction of the ODAB-500 bomb is from 30 to 300 meters, depending on the altitude of the explosion and the weather. The ODAB-500 bomb weighs 500 kg and can be equipped with a parachute. The bomb's TNT equivalent reaches one ton.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRoNNRkeMcs

 

[WW2historian]

Ukrainian servicemen witnessed the impact of a Russian ODAB-500 bomb equipped with a UMPK module. The video is rare and archival, the location of the shooting is not reported, the bomb was presumably dropped by a Su-34NVO aircraft, the bomb exploded over the target. The ODAB-500 bomb was developed by GNPP Bazalt in the late 1980s, it contains ethylene oxide or piperylene, depending on the version. There are 4 versions of bombs in total: ODAB-500, ODAB-500P, ODAB-500PM and ODAB-500PMV. The damaging factor of the ODAB-500 bomb is a blast wave with a pressure of up to 120 atmospheres and thermal radiation of up to 2000 degrees, some call the bomb a vacuum bomb. The radius of destruction of the ODAB-500 bomb is from 30 to 300 meters, depending on the altitude of the explosion and the weather. The ODAB-500 bomb weighs 500 kg and can be equipped with a parachute. The bomb's TNT equivalent reaches one ton.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRoNNRkeMcs

A metric ton has about 10% more weight than a US ton. A 500 kg bomb has about 275 kg of TNT. If this bomb really has an equivalent of one ton of TNT (one ton of TNT also equals 1000 kg) then this bomb has twice the TNT equivalent of it total weight, and 3.6 times the power of TNT. That would be incredible.

 

[WW2historian]

This is a must watch video. Putin is going to tell the US to shove both that carrot and stick up their ass at the same time.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnhrgU8iUZo&t=735s