A Political Thread pt. 2

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Bruce_ma gooshvili]

I'm heading around to cautious optimism about the Ukrainian war effort as it does seem to be going the way that suicidal Russian colonel predicted on TV a couple of months back. The Ukrainians are gaining as much territory as they are losing now and I'm not convinced they are recklessly throwing bodies at it. It seems pretty methodical and they are knocking out bridges in the south and northeast with impressive reliability. Russia is having to resort to ferries on rivers to resupply and seem to consistently be losing assets that they wont be able to replace any time soon.

Ukraine and East European allies are still calling for more tanks and jets (which would help limit their losses in offensive actions) but watching videos it seems to me we are moving away from the era of jets being most important (because artillery is so long ranged and potentially accurate and because anti jet missiles seem pretty accurate against low flying jets). I'm sure jets would be most important if you were willing to carpet bomb from 10,000 feet but so far understandably neither side wants to do that (both want to be 'liberators' of areas with Russian speakers). One of the most important things at the moment seems to be drones (and the ability to disable enemy drones). Stick a drone over a target and the artillery seems to be very accurate when it knows where to aim. This also provides war footage like I've never seen before.

Below is footage of a Russian tank racing back at about 40mph to hide in a barn surrounded by woodland. Ordinarily they'd probably feel completely hidden. But the drone sees it hide in the barn and can direct the artillery to successfully blow it up. Then there is one of a Russian tank speeding in apparent terror to get to safety but he ends up binning it in a pond and having to bail. The whole body language of some of these tanks suggests the drivers are well aware of how capable the response might be.

This guys videos have been posted here previously, he is pretty level headed if obviously completely pro-Ukranian. So if you take the edge off his enthusiasm and understandable bias a bit I think you can get a reasonably accurate interpretation of some of the more interesting events and footage.

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Al Bangor]

 

[Bada-Bing!]

View attachment 14780

Mother Tucker.

 

[McTallshort]

I'm heading around to cautious optimism about the Ukrainian war effort as it does seem to be going the way that suicidal Russian colonel predicted on TV a couple of months back. The Ukrainians are gaining as much territory as they are losing now and I'm not convinced they are recklessly throwing bodies at it. It seems pretty methodical and they are knocking out bridges in the south and northeast with impressive reliability. Russia is having to resort to ferries on rivers to resupply and seem to consistently be losing assets that they wont be able to replace any time soon.

Ukraine and East European allies are still calling for more tanks and jets (which would help limit their losses in offensive actions) but watching videos it seems to me we are moving away from the era of jets being most important (because artillery is so long ranged and potentially accurate and because anti jet missiles seem pretty accurate against low flying jets). I'm sure jets would be most important if you were willing to carpet bomb from 10,000 feet but so far understandably neither side wants to do that (both want to be 'liberators' of areas with Russian speakers). One of the most important things at the moment seems to be drones (and the ability to disable enemy drones). Stick a drone over a target and the artillery seems to be very accurate when it knows where to aim. This also provides war footage like I've never seen before.

Below is footage of a Russian tank racing back at about 40mph to hide in a barn surrounded by woodland. Ordinarily they'd probably feel completely hidden. But the drone sees it hide in the barn and can direct the artillery to successfully blow it up. Then there is one of a Russian tank speeding in apparent terror to get to safety but he ends up binning it in a pond and having to bail. The whole body language of some of these tanks suggests the drivers are well aware of how capable the response might be.

This guys videos have been posted here previously, he is pretty level headed if obviously completely pro-Ukranian. So if you take the edge off his enthusiasm and understandable bias a bit I think you can get a reasonably accurate interpretation of some of the more interesting events and footage.

The current offensive in Kherson is making slow progress but that's normal. Big problems I see for the Ukrainian army is they are still out numbered in the area of the counteroffensive by 3 to 1. NATO doctrine for offensive operations calls for a numerical superiority of 3 to 1 for the attacking force not the defending one! Ukraine is attacking against all the normal presumptions of war which isn't a good idea. They also lack offensive weapons such as tanks which again isn't a good idea.

On the positive side they have systematically been hitting Russian ammunition and supply lines including bridges so the offensive although seemingly abnormal will be draining what little ammo and supply's the Russians have which could result in a break through and capture of large Russian forces but the Russians won't just let this happen so expect something different to come from them

 

[ncurd]

Dorries and Patel confirmed gone with need these small minor merciers. Dorries can do far far far less damage from the Lords.

Really worried about implications its being used as way of getting Johnson a safe seat.

 

[BiggusLaddus]

Big problems I see for the Ukrainian army is they are still out numbered in the area of the counteroffensive by 3 to 1. NATO doctrine for offensive operations calls for a numerical superiority of 3 to 1 for the attacking force not the defending one!

I know you went on to this in the rest of your post, but is that multiple adjusted when the attack is the removal of an occupying force with stretched supply lines, as opposed to a defender on home ground?

Probably not enough to flip it from 3:1 to 1:3...

I get that it is a rule of thumb more than a perfect science, just interested whether there are people playing with all the known variables, trying to determine probabilities of success.

 

[McTallshort]

I know you went on to this in the rest of your post, but is that multiple adjusted when the attack is the removal of an occupying force with stretched supply lines, as opposed to a defender on home ground?

Probably not enough to flip it from 3:1 to 1:3...

I get that it is a rule of thumb more than a perfect science, just interested whether there are people playing with all the known variables, trying to determine probabilities of success.

Yes. Attacking a defensive or several defensive positions is the same no matter who is occupying who. As far as the Russians will be concerned it's their territory anyway.

Edit: that doesn't mean the Ukrainian forces cannot muster a 3 to 1 advantage at a certain point to initiate a break through but they lack the heavy armour to exploit such break throughs

 

[Which Tyler]

What about when the defenders have spent 4-6 weeks being severely under-supplied with food, water, ammunition and arms?

 

[McTallshort]

What about when the defenders have spent 4-6 weeks being severely under-supplied with food, water, ammunition and arms?

Ok. Do you know that? As much as I would love the thought of miserable Russian conscripts sat in their trenches for 4 weeks with no food and little ammo there is no proof to say that is the case and even if that is the truth they only have to defend until enough Ukrainian troops die to make the attack unsustainable.

I'm not saying the Russians will win, not saying the Ukrainians will win but I will reserve judgement on this offensive for now. The Ukrainian conduct in the conflict so far has been brilliant, they have shown flexibility, nouce and a considerable amount of courage but they have been on the defensive. Offensive operations require considerably more resources and will cause considerably more casualties.

 

[Which Tyler]

Define "know" within the context of this war.
I think we can safely state that the Russians in Kherson are under-supplied - they can't not be, given that there's no road or rail link into the city, and they're using pontoon bridges (or possibly were) and/or carrying things across on foot. What we don't "know" is how undersupplied they are, and how that has varied over the last 4-6 weeks. Reports seem to vary between about 1/2 of what they need down to about 1/10 of what they need - though again, who defines "need", and who knows what they're scavenging from the city itself.

Besides, it was a "what if..." question not a "Given that..." statement.

 

[McTallshort]

Fair enough but like I said before they just need enough ammo and supplies to stop the Ukrainian army. There are many incidents were poorly supplied forces have held out against greater odds, not saying the Russians will pull a Tubruck or anything but I have learned to to become too optimistic about the Ukrainian army and not to be too dismissive of the Russians. Attacking with numerically inferior forces without dominance of the air will be a serious challenge.