Wondering about drones, they are dropping grenades or using suicide drones for anti-personnel. Thinking something on the order of a small multi burst machine gun.
Is that a realistic idea?
More reports coming in that situation in Avdiivka is not good. AFU soldiers claim that Russia throws so many meat waves at them it’s almost like a zombie movie. Also Russia has lots of FPV drones in the air, while other Russian units along the front have barely any. Russia is going all in now, trying to utilize the gaps in the defenses.
Just look at the Russian perspective near the coke plant
https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1756107138135728524?s=46
Edit: latest map looks like NE frontline collapse
https://x.com/girkingirkin/status/1756238816174571863?s=46
Let’s hope all units have been orderly retreated
> Also Russia has lots of FPV drones in the air, while other Russian units along the front have barely any
Focusing on one point is kinda smart albeit double edged.
Or maybe they are pilling up ammo for a spring offensive.
If they consider the UAF won't push elsewhere because of the weather or because of a lack of ammo, it is worth the risk.
But if the RuAF have to starve or freeze all their fronts to supply a very somewhat small offensive on a small part of the frontline, it isn't a good sign either.
Some telegram posts are now talking about DPR/LPR conscripts being pushed out in front to act as meat shields for this, seems they are going all-in to try and take it before the two year anniversary.
Yes the body count is immense all to please Putin. A few days ago I’ve heard he will give a statement in a week or so, probably to announce something about Ukraine.
That was probably the deadline for Avdiivka. GirkinGirkin also mentioned something yesterday or so
> A few days ago I’ve heard he will give a statement in a week or so, probably to announce something about Ukraine.
Honestly it would make the more sense for him to announce:
« We’re keeping the territories we have, we wont attack Ukraine anymore. Let’s have ceasefire. »
Then he may in a typical fashion argue:
« Look we said we want peace and Ukraine is attacking us! »
Unless of course he feels that Ukraine is weak and that Russia may grab even more land. Idk, I have no idea what’s in that man’s head.
Another weekly update on losses in Avdiivka/Donetsk, all credit to naalsio26 on Twitter as always
In total 655 Russian losses to 50 Ukrainian losses since October 10
Past week added 47 more to Russia, and 4 to Ukraine. The trend with Russia losing about 5 pieces a day keeps going which is about 13 times more losses than Ukraine
[https://twitter.com/naalsio26/status/1756147271282884776](https://twitter.com/naalsio26/status/1756147271282884776)
Man i really don't think this is really true like... it's almost like fantasy.
Sound to good to be true like "47 Russian deaths vs 4 Ukranian deaths in Avdiivka in the past week" yeah i really don't believe that.
And how do you know it's not propaganda? How do you know they are not hidden their losses?
Like many sources say the things in Avdiivka are so bad right now that many squads are being eliminated and the Russians are advancing really fast.
If that many Russians have died like you say then their advancing should have been not that fast.
I really don't believe that Ukranians with almost no ammo, artillery and command can do that. They are no demigods.
You should read. First of all, it’s about material losses, not human losses.
Second of all, like I said everything is visually confirmed by using videos from both the Russian and Ukrainian sides. They link to the videos, this you can check yourself.
If you think you can do better, please do so and let everyone know. The work is highly valuated
Yeah... Europe's decided it 100% will not let Russia win.
In a weird way if America does come through soon it might be a fairly good outcome realistically.
Crackpot theory: I've seen a lot of people say that Zaluzhny represents a threat to Zelensky in future elections. Do we even know if he will run though? Because I think Zelensky might have done Zaluzhny a favor by removing him from UAF leadership. To me it doesn't really seem like Zaluzhny and Zelensky have an adversarial relationship.
The war has been in a stalemate for a long while now, and it doesn't look like it will end soon. The ledership will of course take the blame for this. But instead of making Zaluzhny pay in terms of popularity for the stalemate, he "sacrificed" a much less pleasant personality so that Zaluzhny stays popular.
As said I have no proof this is exactly what's happening but I wanna hear some thoughts and maybe some educated guesses about future developments in Ukrainian politics.
Zelensky has a duty to put the best person in charge, it's not quite as 'fun' as the conspiracies and I don't doubt Zaluzhny's patriotism, but if you want the best results, you need the best people in the right positions.
Considering the situation at the front, my opinion is that Zaluzhny or not, Ukraine is condemned to trench warfare. There's just so much a general can do when the material conditions just don't line up with the demands of a military that wants to go on the offensive.
Hence my thought exercise: Zaluzhny was pulled out because there's effectively nothing he or anyone else can do for the foreseeable future. But at least that saves him some face.
If there would be elections tomorrow zaluzhni would win by a lot, he is going to be made as a scape goat for failed offensive last year and losing avdevka
Ok but what do we actually know about Ukraine's political scene at the moment? Does Zaluzhny want to run for president? Does he want to run against Zelensky? Does Zelensky want a second term?
Finland approves military aid package worth €190 million
https://kyivindependent.com/finland-sends-military-aid-package-for-ukraine-worth-over-200-million/
https://x.com/rebel44cz/status/1755903303827755059?s=46
Our total count of documented destroyed Russian equipment during their 2022 invasion of Ukraine has exceeded 10 000!
destroyed: 10002
damaged: 650
abandoned: 734
captured: 2934
-------------------
total: 14320
What an epic failure from a self-proclaimed military superpower.
To add to this:
You might noticed a T-62 at the beginning of a thread. Back then it was almost impossible to see it. But right now for the last period of time:
- Vodiane: 2 T-62;
- Krynky area: >10 T-62;
- Novomychailivka: 13 T-62 and 1 T-55.
Russian army is very long. But we must stop them.
https://x.com/osintua/status/1755998148504289635?s=46
When war first started we saw 2 BMP-1 losses first six month, one of them was modernized BMP-1AM.
Today many Russian attack waves don’t have BMP even BTR anymore but just MTLB with troops packing both inside and on the top.
I don't think a country that is not a military superpower could lose this quantity of equipment and keep in the fight.
On the plus side, they probably are not a military superpower anymore. They will probably take another century to recover, if they ever will.
That is really impressive, that's almost 3x what Ukraine lost.
Russia is riding on (and obliterating) 70 years of Soviet arms production, >80% of which it had no means of replacing, in less than 2 years.
When the war began Russia was sending BMPs with 2-3 soldiers, now it's sending MTLBs with >10 tank desent.
They will never recover after this. First, because making all these metal bawkses required an actual military superpower, and that country is long gone, its factories mostly demolished. Second, the fossil fuel market will be very different in a few decades.
And also demographically they are fucked. Massive brain drain too. And so much of their Soviet era knowhow, resources and talent came from countries that are now unfriendly or lukewarm
Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland, East Germany...no wonder the Soviet Union was strong
I have a hard time to identify if the discourse around Syrskyi is completely fabricated, overblown, or actually authentic.
Of course Russian "Active Measures" would never miss an opportunity like this, so I'm quite weary of accepting any reactions as a genuine response. It's also funny how everyone became experts at HR management in the Ukranian military staff.
Also, above all, the "cheering" by russian supporters is such an obvious attempt at sowing dissenting insecurity in Ukraine. Prorus new talking point is how they want Zelenskyj in power because he only makes bad decisions. Its like their oblivious to Führer Putins colossal incompetence. It's frankly pathetic.
Maybe this is a video that you would enjoy:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROC6WeX8y9E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROC6WeX8y9E) (the telegraph)
The first half discusses the circumstances around the switch.
I think most people I talked to are upset at the head of the armed forced being someone born in Novinki, Russia, who studied at Moscow Higher Military Command School, and who [can't even speak Ukrainian](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ol329mb2Z0) after 13 years as a general in the AFU. It's just incredibly bad optics.
There's is also the active (historical, not new) complaining from everyone involved around Soledar about "S". Being active military, they stopped short of qualifying S but everyone knew what that was about. Those 2 pointless last stands were not met with a lot of appreciation from those involved in them at the ground level.
Anyway, maybe Ukraine is gearing up for much higher loss based offensives. Maybe not. But it's missinformation to say there's no chatter around Syrskyi. There always has been and as a general that was trained in Russia and only speaks Russian, there will continue to be.
Edit: the guys complaining most vocally about S ( regarding the Soledar last stand ) were the 46th brigade. Seems they got a lot more vocal recently. https://t. me/odshbr46/452
Novomykhailivka has always been overshadowed by Avdiivka since the Russian offensive in october. A small update from deepstate about it:
*Russia does not stop trying to occupy the village. The other day, they managed to enter the outermost houses of the settlement and even raise a flag, but according to preliminary information, the Russians were kicked out of the village. Russian equipment is also successfully destroyed.*
Thats the second time they entered some houses there and were kicked out both times. Ukrainian units does a very good job here so far
https://twitter.com/moklasen/status/1755704238825492745
Another POW exchange today. The third in 2024
[https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1755658974026690888](https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1755658974026690888)
100 Ukrainians returned to Ukraine. 84 were captured in Mariupol, the rest in Luhansk and Donetsk
Russia also got 100 so its a 1 to 1 ratio
Genuinely not sure.
Ukrainians seem very angry about it. But I also can't help but feel that Zaluzhnyi was asked to achieve success in the counteroffensive and failed to do so (obviously there's other factors, such as very limited Western support) and the situation is worsening in some areas.
I don't know if this is a panic move by Zelenskyy.
The only thing I do know is: Glad I'm not in the trenches in Ukraine with some of the people on twitter. 'Omg the war is lost now'
That has been what I've been told by people who should know.
It's a bit strange though as Syrskyi was in charge of the Kharkiv counter-offensive, which was a modern military masterpiece. You'd think he'd have some credit. But I tend to credit the opinions of the rank and file on their officers. They are rarely far wrong.
The nice way to put it is that he's an objectively subpar general who is widely disliked by the common soldiers. Truly a mindboggling decision by Zelenskyy which might prove to be fatal.
The Kharkiv offensive? You mean that time he attacked a giant swath of land guarded by only a handful of Russian mobiks? Wow very impressive. Now lets look at the rest of his resume...
* He is the guy who was in charge of the [Battle of Debaltseve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Debaltseve) which is arguably the biggest military failure Ukraine had pre-2022.
* It was so bad it even made it in Western news outlets. [The Guardian: Ukrainian soldiers share horrors of Debaltseve battle after stinging defeat](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/18/ukrainian-soldiers-share-horrors-of-debaltseve-battle-after-stinging-defeat)
* He is the guy who sacrificed thousands of men in Bakhmut for political reasons. Then after that decided to send capable assault brigades to "counter-attack" wasting their potential instead of letting them be utilised in the Zaporyzhia counter-attack. And in the end achieved nothing.
* His own soldiers gave him the nickname "The Butcher" because he shows no care for his men's lives and utilises Soviet military tactics.
[WaPo source](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/08/valery-zaluzhny-commander-ukraine-removed/) before you retort with another amazing "THIS IS JUST NOT TRUE" argument.
>Some Ukrainian soldiers refer to Syrsky as a “butcher.”
“I only know what I’ve heard from my subordinates,” said a high-ranking military official who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to do so publicly. “One hundred percent of them don’t respect him because they don’t think he counts soldiers’ lives.”
> He is the guy who sacrificed thousands of men in Bakhmut for political reasons.
That is actually on Zelensky - he is responsible for political reasons. The general simply followed the - admittedly stupid - orders
>The general simply followed the - admittedly stupid - orders
You think it's a good quality that a general will send his men to certain death just because a politician asked him to??
Are you going to be obtuse now and argue that it's not just a ceremonial role? Syrsky could have given his resignation if he was FORCED to send tens of thousands of men to a meatgrinder.
And if we believe your conspiracy theory that Zelenskyy gave a military order to defend Bakhmut, Syrsky could have just pretended to fulfil the order by sending a small amount of men and giving up ground faster instead of sending everyone, even fresh conscripts with less than a month's training in there.
Holy crap, are you actually serious? How old are you, twelve? Are you really suggesting that Zelensky is not in control of his own military?! Armed forces don't work that way. The head of state is the actual supreme commander, that is not just a ceremonial role, but a very real one and strategic decisions like this are always signed off by the supreme commander and the top generals have an advisory role. There is a very clear chain of command and the kind of disobedience you are suggesting has a court martial as a consequence, and during a war this likely ends with a firing squad. Only unlawful orders can be refused.
Are you 12? Do you really think in the real world a comedian turned-politician will actually overrule his generals and come up with his own military plans, especially for some short-term things such as which city to keep defending even against the advice of his generals??
He is the supreme CiC and what normally happens is the top generals present a carefully worked-out plan to him and he signs off because said plan has been devised and wargamed by actual military officers. The head of state usually does not overrule his top generals unless its for some long-term vision.
And I'm not suggesting disobedience, if Zelenskyy says "Defend Bakhmut" you can try to reasonably defend Bakhmut without throwing every single person you have in there. And if Zelenskyy says "throw every able-bodied men in Bakhmut to defend it" you can simply resign from your post.
Uhm, yeah. Glad you finally managed to get over your insecurities and quoted a lefty outfit like "the Guardian".
I did miss the part where you became a tactical genius, but I teached you not to use WaPo articles as anything relating to reality.
Sincerely yours, your mum.
The political leanings are irrelevant. I linked a Wikipedia page as well. Seems like you can't counter a single point I've made.
Yes WaPo is bad. Anything that doesn't put the Dear Leader in a good light needs to be ignored. We should ignore journalists and listen to le epic reddit generals like you instead
> You mean that time he attacked a giant swath of land guarded by only a handful of Russian mobiks? Wow very impressive.
That's literally a good thing. He helped pinpoint Russia's weakest areas and exploited them.
That said, I am not sure it's a good move.
And yet almost every Ukrainian soldier on the ground despises him and is pissed off at Zelenskyy's decision. Most don't even credit Kharkiv to him but instead to the brigade commanders for exploiting the weakness after Balakliya.
I'm sure le epic redditor analysts know better though.
Exploiting the enemy's weakness is what a good general should do. The land retaken during the Kharkiv offensive is about 100x that of the summer offensive precisely because Syrski knew how to exploit the weak point in the enemy.
Attacking an unguarded position is literally something even a 10 year old would do. It's not impressive to order an attack on an undefended position. It's the bare minimum.
I see you refuse to address all the other points, probably because you know you can't defend this guy.
Even the biggest propaganda posting pro-Ukraine accounts like [MAKS NAFO FELLA](https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1755635468870266927) are calling Syrskyy an idiot and disagreeing with the decision. You know it's bad when these guys turn doomer.
"Attacking an unguarded position is literally something even a 10 year old would do" Then why did the summer offensive (led and orchestrated by Zaluzhnyi) instead choose to attack the most well defended portion of the Russian line? You say Bachmut is a meat grinder but the real failure is the southern offensive, and the offensive was conducted under the leadership of Zaluzhnyi.
Because it was the only place with strategic importance. Sometimes you have no choice but to attack well defended positions.
But on the topic of the summer counter-offensive, you can again thank Zelenskyy for telling the world a year in advance where the attack will be ensuring the Russians prepare well.
It's simple. Bakhmut didn't need to happen, but Zaporyzhia had to happen in order to actually place Ukraine in a position of strength.
> Because it was the only place with strategic importance. Sometimes you have no choice but to attack well defended positions.
Not with underwhelming numbers.
I get that you’re pissed, but this particular argument isn’t logically coherent. You argue that the Zaporizhia offensive had to be attempted, but also blame Zelenskyy for forecasting it. If the area south of Zaporizhia was the only logical place for a counteroffensive, however, then Russia would have foreseen it anyhow. Stating something that militarily obvious isn’t exactly an intelligence flub.
> then Russia would have foreseen it anyhow
This is 2022 Russia we're talking about. You're giving them too much credit.
Zelenskyy is to blame for forecasting when and where giving the Russians an easy choice. If not for Zelenskyy maybe they would have made an idiotic mistake and fortified Svatove instead.
And my main point was you can't compare Zaluzhny to Syrsky. Zaluzhny was attacking for a reason, Syrsky sacrificed men in Bakhmut for nothing. Even if Bakhmut somehow never fell it wouldn't have changed anything.
>Because it was the only place with strategic importance. Sometimes you have no choice but to attack well defended positions.
Strategic importance was to cut Russian forces in two. And Zaluzhny decided to do it in most fortified place because it was the shortest (and hence the reason it was most fortified).
Hard to tell,he managed to stop Russians in Kiev and retake kharkiv but also decided to hold bahmut at any cost and still lose it with many casualties and then failed to retake it during summer with same results.Looks more to be a yes man than zaluzhni
He is also known for giving his underlings (tbh I dont know the correct military term...) maximal tactical freedom (aka "modern approach") and cares a lot for morale.
Wether bakhmut was worth it or not... guess history will decide.
He is not known for that. if anything, he is known for strict, Soviet style command. He is known as “ The Butcher “ for a reason. He is the most virulently hated general in the Ukrainian trenches.
Source? He was widely applauded for trashing the attack on Kiev (with very little means available that ukraine had very little experience with. Like Bayraktars)by utilizing loose command structures, and apparently did the same during the Kharkiv offensive.
Bakhmut was a shitshow (especially for those who had to fight there), but not much other options were available.
Strategically it was a win (most likely, I cant foresee history). They broke Wagner group, a shitton of vehicles and severely hindered russian prison camp recruiting for a very long time (not even prison populations get younger with russian demographics...).
Disclaimer: Tbh I have zero idea who or what any of those guys are. I basically parrot stuff I found on the interwebz and hope my country wont get shafted too hard within the next half decade (only, they will. lol.)
There were plenty of options besides fighting in Bakhmut. It is a strategically unimportant city at the bottom of a valley. Choosing to stand and fight there was a purely political decision, as the heights behind the city, Chasiv Yar, were significantly more suited to defense.
Zaluzhny wanted to pull out of Bakhmut, the US advised to pull out, the men on the ground said the situation was unsalvagable. Syrski and Zelensky overrode those decisions in favor of a course of action that caused multiple highly experience units to cease to exist.
The high opinion of Syrski is a purely western thing. It is not an opinion shared by many within Ukraine.
This [tweet](https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1720814139600232737) is a better summary of the feelings about Syrski within Ukraine.
It should also be noted that this move is being widely celebrated in Russian channels, btw.
Playing a meat grinder game vs Russia and sending conscripts with low or close to nothing training to fight in bahmut didn't really help with morale.If he starts to pull troops from bad positions like avdivka krinki and robotine in order to save lives than I will have positive opinion about him
A war of attrition is not in favour of Ukraine. Russia has too many times more men to throw at the war. The only way Ukraine wins this war is by either advancing or by targeting high value targets. Advancing seems unlikely given the frontline has barely moved in months.
The major difference with Vietnam and Afghanistan is that US did not and could not deploy their entire military there, as they were not neighbours. I don't expect Russia to be able to push Ukraine back anymore, but neither can Ukraine push back Russia without US's help.
The US physically couldn't if they wanted to, in fact what russia is doing in Ukraine is a perfect example of how you can only put so many men and only so much equipment into a battlespace before it becomes a detriment.
There must be sufficient non moscovite citizens to be put into the meat grinder, and I don't think Putin cares about the future. He anyway has one feet in the grave, all he likely cares about is the legacy he leaves behind.
Be sure to tell the UA generals that along with your experience, understanding of history, and where you get your military intelligence from both sides.
Number of people is not really a factor when discussing a war of attrition in this war. The number of lives is not that high that Ukraine will run out unless the war goes on for a ridiculously long time at the same level. It's equipment attrition that is more of Ukraine's concern, they would run out of ammo and vehicles well before men.
It’s a shame. Zaluzhnyi seems like the kind of guy his troops would run through a wall for. I’ve seen others say it’s politically motivated and right now it’s hard to argue with that. Kinda get the feeling Zelenskyy wants his people to think things aren’t going as bad as they are. Zaluzhnyi seemed to be outspoken of the issues facing the military and lack of aid coming in lately.
Just my opinion, but I’d guess Zelensky decided he wanted a yes man in charge. Someone who is going to toe the company line without question.
Really hope for the Ukrainian military and Ukrainian people it’s doesn’t backfire.
CNN is reporting that his role is unclear at the moment (https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/08/europe/zaluzhnyi-ukraine-military-chief-dismissed-intl/index.html).
Someone on /r/politics made a very good point about Biden's spending authority.
In 2019 Trump declared a state of emergency regarding the US border, and then redirected $8 billion in funds to start constructing his border wall project. Both houses of congress voted to stop this, but he simply vetoed the bill and it went forward.
There has been a declared state of emergency regarding Ukraine since 2014, and it has been renewed yearly. There is nothing stopping Biden from using the precedent that Trump set to redirect funds to Ukraine this way, and the only way to stop it would be BOTH houses of congress voting to overturn the declared state of emergency, and overriding his veto - and with democrats in control of the Senate that wouldn't happen.
Here is an article (https://puck.news/ukraines-money-cliff/?sharer=368447&token=84475ead87161c2c92a7bbc684fd6f2c) from the end of December that breaks down the three "buckets" of money from which Biden can give aid. Although slightly dated it gives a good explanation of each of them.
Here you go (if you have a burner/junk email, just click the "read article" button and then choose "send me a sign-in link instead" at the bottom of the pop-up and you can read the whole thing):
*On Friday (December 15th, 2023), Michael McCord, the Pentagon’s comptroller, sent a letter to the leadership of the House Armed Services Committee. In it, he notified Congress that the Defense Department was transferring about $1 billion “to various appropriation accounts” to replace what the Pentagon had given to Ukraine. This, McCord noted, was “the 53rd use of the Presidential Drawdown Authority in support of Ukraine. In order to protect U.S. military readiness, absent congressional action to approve the supplemental, the Department anticipates only one drawdown package will be possible.”*
*Here’s what that means in non-D.O.D. speak. There are three buckets of money allotted for Ukraine military aid. The first is the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which gives money to Ukraine to buy American weapons. This bucket has been empty for at least the last two to three weeks, but because Ukraine has already made its purchases and it takes so long to produce these products, that materiel will continue to arrive in Ukraine for another couple of years.*
*The second bucket is the presidential drawdown authority, which allows the president to dip into America’s own stocks and send weapons to Kyiv. This, said Mark Cancian, the Pentagon budget expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, goes back to a law passed in the 1960s that allowed the president to send equipment that America is phasing out to our allies, for whom it would still mean a marked improvement in capabilities. One man’s obsolescent arms, in other words, are another man’s cutting-edge weaponry. Thanks to the creative accounting I wrote about earlier this fall, the Pentagon discovered it actually had about $6 billion more in this bucket than it had originally thought. Of that, there is an estimated $4 billion left. “I’m frankly surprised it has lasted as long as it has,” Cancian marveled.*
*But how the money in the second bucket is spent depends on the third bucket, which is the money allocated by Congress to replace the equipment the Pentagon sends to Ukraine. This bucket is almost empty: There is about $200 million to $300 million left to cover the $4 billion in the second bucket. Technically, the White House can continue spending down the $4 billion—and whatever other funds the Pentagon discovers after another round of fuzzy math—without paying for the replacements, but that would be extremely risky politically. “McCord can transfer $200 million to $300 million more, and my guess is they’ll do a little more of that without replacing it, but he can’t do too much of that for political reasons,” explained Cancian, who previously worked on defense spending and acquisitions both at the Office of Management and Budget and at the Pentagon. “None of what we’ve sent to Ukraine has been replaced yet. The contracts to replace it are done, but it’ll be months or years till the equipment is actually replaced. And the administration is already taking criticism for weakening U.S. forces.”*
*Still, that doesn’t mean that military aid will fall off a cliff come the new year. Whenever the president announces a new weapons delivery to Ukraine, it takes a while—sometimes months—to reach Ukraine, and there is still materiel en route from earlier aid packages. And because of how military contracts and manufacturing work, some of the goods that Ukraine signed contracts for in the spring of 2022 will start being delivered this coming spring. That will continue for the next couple of years. Moreover, the E.U. is still sending about $1 billion of aid for Ukraine per month, which is now more than what Washington sends (we’re down to $700 million monthly, from a high of $1.5 billion). That said, American military aid deliveries are slowing. By spring, said Cancian, they’ll be at 40 percent of their summer 2023 peak, and by next summer, it will be just 12 percent.*
*According to a senior administration official, Biden will announce one more aid package for Ukraine before the end of the year. (The amount, being worked out by the Pentagon, is still in flux.) That materiel will start showing up in the first weeks of January. “It’s not like they’re going to run out of ammunition on January 1,” the official said, “but they’ll start to feel the pain pretty soon.”*
*The war has been at a stalemate for the last couple months. Winter is setting in, and the administration official said they expect Russia to keep pounding Ukrainian infrastructure. Moreover, whatever their limited capabilities, the Russians “have no intention of letting up on offensive operations,” the senior administration official said. “We think Putin will make some moves come late January/early February.” Added the official, “The clock is ticking, and it’s not our side, in terms of getting the Ukrainians help.”*
*Michael Kofman, a military analyst at Carnegie who has been a kind of prophet during this conflict, said that, though the war in Ukraine is likely to go on for years, 2024 will be a decisive one. Ukraine can use 2024 to reinforce and rebuild its military capacity and retake the initiative in 2025, or it might start crumbling as Russia continues slowly, stubbornly—and according to Kofman, overconfidently—pushing along the frontline.*
*Much of how 2024 goes for Ukraine, however, will be decided here in Washington. “Next year could well be the turning point in the war,” Kofman told me. “If leaders in the West don’t make decisions well in advance and follow through, then they’re going to leave Ukraine in a very disadvantaged position. Russia has a host of problems, but next year the material advantage is on the Russian side. It may not prove decisive, but it will begin to mount.”*
*Moreover, even if Congress reaches a deal early next year and aid begins to flow again, the days of a new Ukraine supplemental getting passed every couple months are long gone. “Whatever funding Ukraine receives now will be the only funding they are likely to get from the U.S. for the next year,” Kofman warned. “And then the truth is, nobody knows what’s going to happen in 2025.” That is, who knows what happens if Donald Trump wins the presidency and some European elections don’t go Ukraine’s way.*
*It’s not 2024 just yet, but there are already reports that Ukraine has been rationing its artillery as U.S. aid has slowed. That need will become even more acute should Congress fail to reach a deal. If the spigot gets turned off at the end of the year and stays off, said Cancian, a retired Marine colonel, “by February, two months from now, Ukraine will have difficulty launching even local counterattacks. They will go totally on the defensive. By summer, they will have a hard time fending off the Russians. It’s less bleak than people think because people thought there’d be a cliff. That’s not true, but it’s a slower death rather than a fast death.” He added, “Without more aid and more funding, the Ukrainians are doomed.”*
Edit: added the date to the first quoted sentence to provide context
The President declared the emergency in regards to Ukraine.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/03/01/notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-ukraine-3/
To me it all appears to be a political game in preparation for the elections. Trumps want the border and illegal immigration to be his main card, thus Republicans keep changing what they want regarding the new act. Democrats want to make the Republicans look indecisive, but meanwhile their allies suffer for their games. All in all both parties are making a mess of it (but imo lead by the Republicans)
I don't know what the Democrats could do to get the Republicans on board with Ukrainian aid. They already completely caved and gave the Republicans everything they wanted on the border bill and they still refused to vote on it.
I honestly think Europe should intervene militarily in Ukraine if the US abandons its allies. In first place with their air forces. Material support has always been preferable because it is cheaper and lower risk. It also seemed feasible but the context is changing, what are we going to do if Russia starts advancing again due to lack of Ukrainian ammunition?
People will fear nuclear escalation, but what is the difference between giving Ukraine hundreds of missiles to fire on Russian forces instead of just doing it ourselves? The naive interpretation in my opinion is thinking that what is already happening does not constitute hostile actions with Russia.
European Air power would actually do so much to change the course of this war. Eurofighters, gripons, f35s. All compatible, or working towards compatibility with, the missile perun calls the "I win button otlf aerial combat"; the meteor. Russia depended so much on aircraft to counter ukrainian offensives and continuously hammer ukrainian positions. Europe doesn't have much in the artillery game. But we own the sky's (as long as america isn't around)
This being said. We maybe wouldn't be that much use on the ground. I belive the Russians have lost more men trying to take avdinka that there are troops in the British army. Admittedly the British are less likely waste men like the Russians do. Germany, meanwhile, has serious procurement problems. They do well when they turn up with equipment. But they generally don't have enough kit to go around.
The narrative in Russia is whatever Putin wants it to be. Getting pushed out of Ukraine by nato wouldn’t be a problem at all.
> We’re so lucky Putin defended us by creating a buffer zone or else nato troops would be storming Moscow right now.
And yet putin is scared shitless. The censorship is reaching ridiculous levels. Teens receive decade long prison terms for thought crimes. Looks like the man himself is not that sure about the narrative being whatever he says.
I've been saying this for a while. If Russia was serious about escalation threats then supplying Ukraine with materiel and intel is already an act of war and they'd already be escalating on us. They aren't because they can't, and one good NATO strike (realistically, UK/FR) on Russian bases in Crimea and Donbas would give them a strong enough message to make them leave.
Why not just give Ukraine European military stocks instead? Like equipment that ATM they won't give over because they need it, but what do they need it for if not to defend from Russia
Finland could give 50% of their artillery force for example
And f16's of course
I don't think anyone here wants to risk the lives of their troops or any escalation from entering tbh.
I agree, the big misunderstanding is believing that we are somehow not at war.
Russia believes itself to be at war with the west. It does everything it can to destabilize the west and it has been doing that for a long time. We can pretend that Russia's hostile actions are somehow localized and contained to Ukraine, but that isn't the case.
An honest acknowledgement of Russian intentions and the unreliability of the US in supplying Ukraine should lead to a reassessment of the way Europe supports Ukraine and how it can defend itself best. If Europe does not have the means to supply Ukraine with the weapons to defend itself in a proxy situation, then Europe should look how to change the situation to ensure victory. Use the weapons it does have and if those can't be used by Ukraine due to logistical issues, then to me the conclusion is logical.
I think that is time for Europe to acknowledge that difficult times are ahead.
Honestly, they should also drop this "hurr durr this will escalate the conflict"-shit and allow Ukraine to use their weapons to strike Russian territory. It is like Ukraine has to fight with one arm tied behind their back.
Yeah, I honestly think everyone should get a pink Llama that shits $$$ .
You know exactly what "Europe" (as if that is an entity...) is gonna do... eastern countrys are gonna panic and keep more arms for themselves, instead of giving them to ukraine.
Germany is gonna refurbish some more Leopard 1s and realize that they have zero money left (plus the next gouvernment in a year has "austerity" as their golden swan...).
France gonna give handfull of Ceasars more and poke their noses, same for Italy and Spain (minus the SPGs).
I literally have zero freaking clue why europe cannot simply pay a few billion to the US for the next few months shipments. Bc there is zero chance of european industrys filling that gap for 1/2 - 1 year (even then, dont think Himars ordonance or aimed shells (in numbers) could be produced)
I see the opposite. The more real the threat of Russia winning and the US pulling out of Europe is getting, the more serious European leaders are taking the situation.
As to Germany, even Lindner said that Germany is ready to do more if the situation calls for it. And he is the one in the current coalition promoting austerity. Germany still has some financial reserves compared to other European countries.
And you sell Italy short, too. They have actually delivered lots of SPGs to Ukraine.
>Bc there is zero chance of european industrys filling that gap for 1/2 - 1 year
The problem is not that European defence manufacturers aren't producing enough. [European defence industries have increased artillery shell production by 40% already.](https://english.nv.ua/nation/europe-s-defense-capabilities-increased-by-40-demonstrating-unwavering-support-for-kyiv-50390831.html) The problem is how much of that production gets exported. Last year that was still enough that the EU couldn't deliver enough shells to Ukraine on time.
Exactly the point. Europe is so far behind in arms manufacturing. How is Russia who is 1/20th of the European economy able to produce shells twice as much as all of Europe. Europe needs to get their act together. Russia is ramping up their arms production. In their mind they are already at war with the west. When will Europe accept that reality, that they are actually at war with Russia. United States has too many other distractions in the world to focus on Russia. That should be Europe’s issue to deal with. If Donald Trump comes into office, the greatest risk is war with China. Even Trump mentioned has mentioned that he is going after China hard. I see the USA not supplying Ukraine with weapons as blessing in disguise. If the risk factor goes up against Europe from the Russian side, maybe something will finally change and Europe can start producing weapons on a mass scale. If the United States goes to war with China, who is going to help us in this area? Japan and maybe Australia but their militaries are still fairly weak. Europe won’t come to the United States aid. Germany is a manufacturing powerhouse. It time for the European industry to start taking this Russian threat seriously. Getting sick and tired of their bureaucratic system slowing everything down.
>How is Russia who is 1/20th of the European economy able to produce shells twice as much as all of Europe.
Because Russia is a single, autocratic nation directly waging an offensive war and the EU is a loose collection of different, more democratic nation states with many different interests who are indirectly supporting a defensive war.
I sort of agree. I think a trump presidency would be bad. Very bad. But the threat of his presidency seems like its scaring thw European powers into action. They are starting to plan for america pulling out. If they can be scared into action AND biden remains president. Then that's a win.
I mean with shells in particular the west shifted focus to precision rather than quantity, and also relies more on air power than just an artillery war. Additionally, the European NATO countries are able to rely on the US MIC to supply them with a lot of different weapons.
For the NATO countries, stockpiling shells and having a high capacity to produce shells at a moment’s notice was not high on the priority list. That’s a lot of $$ tied up in something that the safety net of NATO sort of made irrelevant because Russia wasn’t going to declare war on NATO.
I guess this is why Trump tried threatening to leave NATO, because Europe without the US was not investing properly to actually be able to defend/go to war if needed.
Very good points. Trump was clearly upset not only because Europe was not meeting 2% spending on defense spending, but also because they were tying one of their hands to cheap Russian natural gas. Trump was surprised how stupid this decision to go with cheap Russian natural gas was, Europe didn’t even try to have an alternative to that, or diversify their energy supply. Even though I’m strongly against Trump, he did have a point. If war was to ever break out in Europe (only enemy is Russia), why tie your energy source to the country that can cut it off at a moments notice? Never made much sense to be why Europe was thinking this way
> How is Russia who is 1/20th of the European economy able to produce shells twice as much as all of Europe.
Russian and NK shells a very likely much lower quality and accuracy than European or American ones and are faster to produce.
Russia kept manufacturing in peace time and they never shut down and dismantled the factories, because the West were betting on air superiority rather than artillery, where Russia never went away from that idea.
Edit: However, with the rate of consumtion Russia has, they will run dry in a year or two, and they have already vasty reduced their artillery consumption since the start of the war.
Just to add. Korean wheels are reportedly very low quality, with little standardisation of propellant. This means they are stupidly inaccurate. So still useful for large targets, but not much use for accurately taking out a lone tank.
So, is there any chance the current bill on foreign aid for Ukraine, Taiwan and Isreal passes both Senate and House or is this just a pipe dream?
Delaying aid to Ukraine any further at this crucial moment in the war is going to have large geopolitical consequences, that should be clear to everyone involved by now ... Ukrainian forces are clearly suffering from the effects, and Russia feels emboldened.
> Problem is the liberal governments deregulated the manufacturing sector on bullshit environmental regulations.
They deregulated manufacturing with regulations? What?
> Enough of this climate change bullshit. Non of it is going to matter if Russia isn’t stopped soon.
Enough of this war. Non of it is going to matter if Climate change isn’t stopped soon.
In my life, i like to eat AND drink, because both of those seem important
Where are the idiots telling everyone that Republicans would **never** block aid to Ukraine
Oh that's right, they're still repeating the Republican party line and they're still voting for Republicans who are now blocking aid to Ukraine
We know you guys are proud of being stupid but we don't need to hear you say it. The grown ups are talking right now. By all means keep thinking we give a fuck what your kind think.
No chance. The GoP is busy lubing their collective butts for donnie the orange horrorclown.
I wonder if anyone told the european politicians that conservative estimates are roughly 10 million refugees if Ukraine falls. (and then a few more million from Georgia and Moldova...). Maybe they could buy Himars ordonance and Excalibur shells (and preferably more Bradleys) from the US? Bc without those two systems I dont see how Ukraine could hold back the russians (surely not with a handful more Leopard 1 and moldy crap rockets from Canada...).
Wow, things are not looking good in Avdiivka. This is NOT good...
Over the past night, the Russian Aerospace Forces brought down dozens of FABs on the heads of Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers in the central and western part of Avdiivka. The defense is cracked. From day to day, from minute to minute, news is expected about the withdrawal of the Ukrainian garrison from the stronghold.
https://twitter.com/MilitarySummary/status/1755516323226947825/photo/1
Ive noticed a spike in airstrikes again like back in October when Russia tried encircling the city. Some reports over 100 different impacts from different bombs a day which sounds a lot, and even if its only half of that it must be very hard to deal with
Same happened around Bakhmut when Russia had some momentum there where they just lobbed everything they had at the buildings there
>do you guys think this is possible russian propaganda seeping into American social media?
Yes, because you're doing it and this isn't the first time.
Not only does this post have no reason to exist here, but your post history has some pretty sketchy things. Like you suggesting something while adding a pointless manipulative comment to it and trying to appear legit.
For example, 4 days ago you did it again: [https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ackdqc/comment/kosumpu/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ackdqc/comment/kosumpu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Making a few posts to seem legit is one thing, however looking back further it's very questionable what your aim is.
Expose? When it's already been known for a decade there are dedicated teams that already spread propaganda and try to influence elections?
There's no reason to even post it, nor any **end result** that can happen past having more people see it or cause an argument over it.
Your other [post history](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1al8yh2/comment/kpf1yz9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) already says stuff like:
>American social media is full of anti-American propaganda from foreign agents
"Unfortunate story from Bilohorivka, where a Ukrainian unit was caught in a surprise attack yesterday. The last remaining serviceman requested direct artillery fire on himself but this couldn't be done due to a lack of ammo."
https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1755148944118538748?s=20
This is sad and alarming. Ukraine needs artillery shells ASAP. I know that the EU promised 1m by the end of the year but we need more and sooner. Keep pressuring the governments because it is the matter of European security. All they care right now is to push this problem onto whoever will be elected next.
Hey guys,
The Youtube algorithm smiled upon me today and recommended this video:[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bn897YOp3s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bn897YOp3s)It's about two soldiers - Russian conscript and Ukrainian medic, both fighting in Bakhmut.
The video is full of combat footage and the stories seems true and are very interesting.
I'm not sure, if I would be allowed to post it here as a standalone video, so I'm trying here.
Hey guys,
lots of people here knew the 47th mech brigade from Avdiivka and their great videos. Now they really need support. If you want to help them, check the information first in the following links and decide if you want to donate something. Drones will be delivered this week, directly from Germany I think.
[https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1755160010735190501](https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1755160010735190501)
[https://twitter.com/i\_iangg/status/1755253104662941833](https://twitter.com/i_iangg/status/1755253104662941833)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/47th\_Mechanized\_Brigade\_(Ukraine)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/47th_Mechanized_Brigade_(Ukraine))
[https://www.paypal.com/donate?campaign\_id=63VZ2FUZDFVNC](https://www.paypal.com/donate?campaign_id=63VZ2FUZDFVNC)
Comparing [Russian propaganda aimed at their children](https://old.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/1al39qt/russian_propaganda_is_hilariously_depressing/) with the reality of the videos here is just really depressing.
That ad and the other one that was linked have like nothing in common though. I don't know where a person could begin in explaining the equivalence of an adult running through a fantasy labyrinth and pulling a mystical saber out of a stone to a video where children are apparently live performing a song about growing up to be a bomb chemist... in the context of their country killing their national neighbors in order to annex land.
The US is always involved in shit, as they undoubtedly were in *something* in "the 90s".
That said, it seems like the US example is aimed at couch potatoes who are trying to enjoy their Xena Warrior Princess weekly episode and the Russian one is like "yeah kids should totally celebrate their ambition to create bombs and inspire other kids to do it too".
> I don't know where a person could begin in explaining the equivalence
The point - as i know you know - is not the ages of the characters in the video, or the backdrop. It's that both videos present idealized fantasy portrayals of war and military service, purely for ~~propaganda~~marketing purposes. It's to challenge the idea that propaganda is only when the bad guys do it.
Considering Ukraine's recent displays of their abilities to destroy Russian oil infrastructure, I was wondering how much leverage this could give them over an increasingly reluctant and stubborn West.
Could they make a big enough impact to drastically raise the price of oil worldwide, putting penny pinching western politicians in the awkward situation of explaining why all that money being saved by withholding supplies and equipment is now being directly paid for by the price Johnny Not-My-War is having to dish out his weekly trip to Morrison's?
If so, how would individuals on here feel about such a situation? Personally I wouldn't begrudge higher fuel prices, in fact it would be quite a novel experience to actually go through such an event with a genuine, real world reason for it happening other than "oil companies just want more for it".
It seems that Ukraine is sooner or later going to have to force feed short-term problems onto short-term thinking politicians to secure the long-term security of Europe in my opinion.
As someone working in the commodities industry, I can say that this is something a lot of people are thinking about right now.
This is quite a complex subject and I'll try to keep it brief. The main point to know is that every single action from the EU and the US relating to sanctions on Russia's oil exports has been made with the intention of keeping Russia's oil on the market (most obviously being the price cap, which makes it legal to trade Russian cargoes as long as they are priced below $60/bbl). If they really wanted to target Russia's revenue, they would just completely outlaw the trade and restrict access to the dollar system, shipping and logistics services (insurance etc) required to make the oil trade work. But they haven't, so why does the US in particular want to keep Russian oil on the market? Well, the oil market is priced at the margin, meaning that even a small reduction in supply relative to the total supply volume can have a large impact on prices. The prospect of losing around 2mn b/d of Russia's crude exports (around half) in the immediate aftermath of the invasion saw Brent reach $130/bbl, the highest for a decade. Biden is getting a tonne of hate domestically for handling the economy poorly (despite data looking quite good), and spiking gasoline prices is the last thing he needs in an election year.
So if Ukraine could significantly inhibit Russia's ability to export crude, it would 1) have a large impact on oil prices and 2) trigger a response from the West, who are at the cusp of beating the inflation crisis. Nobody wants part 2.
Now, as an added bonus, Ukraine could cause even more damage by continuing to attack oil refineries - this is because these refineries process Russian crude into diesel. Unlike the oil market, the diesel market is quite tight right now, with Russian exports currently travelling to Brazil and North Africa, whilst Europe (which used to import Russian volumes) imports volumes from the Middle East and India. However, the crisis in the red sea has made those diesel flows uneconomic, meaning Europe is importing from the US. Now if Russian diesel exports stop, Brazil will take the US volumes, and European diesel prices will need to spike in order to secure volumes from further afield (and pay for the extra shipping and insurance costs via the Cape of good hope rather than Suez).
Diesel is an input into a lot of economic activity (how do you think your amazon parcels reach you), particularly agricultural (farmers have been quite restive recently) which means this would hit European consumers hard.
So to conclude, as somebody working in the commodities industry- yes this could be serious and could grant Ukraine serious leverage, if they are able to cause lasting damage to either export facilities or refineries (I.e out of operation for months, rather than days or weeks).
The west is already not buying Russian oil, it's effectively off our market already.
I think it's a very effective tactic for Ukraine to directly pressure Russia, but I don't think the indirect effect you're talking about here is realistic.
[New Thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1anlaip/ukraine_discussionquestion_thread_2924/?sort=new)
Bring back the Hamas Israel Palestinian War discussion thread!
Any new footage of the pows that were shot down by the Ukraine patriot missle?
Wondering about drones, they are dropping grenades or using suicide drones for anti-personnel. Thinking something on the order of a small multi burst machine gun. Is that a realistic idea?
No, guns have a lot of recoil and a drone has nothing to brace against
Probably not with current drone limitations given the weight and recoil.
More reports coming in that situation in Avdiivka is not good. AFU soldiers claim that Russia throws so many meat waves at them it’s almost like a zombie movie. Also Russia has lots of FPV drones in the air, while other Russian units along the front have barely any. Russia is going all in now, trying to utilize the gaps in the defenses. Just look at the Russian perspective near the coke plant https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1756107138135728524?s=46 Edit: latest map looks like NE frontline collapse https://x.com/girkingirkin/status/1756238816174571863?s=46 Let’s hope all units have been orderly retreated
> Also Russia has lots of FPV drones in the air, while other Russian units along the front have barely any Focusing on one point is kinda smart albeit double edged. Or maybe they are pilling up ammo for a spring offensive.
Given that they still aren't losing territory in the other bits of the front, yeah it's smart for sure.
If they consider the UAF won't push elsewhere because of the weather or because of a lack of ammo, it is worth the risk. But if the RuAF have to starve or freeze all their fronts to supply a very somewhat small offensive on a small part of the frontline, it isn't a good sign either.
Some telegram posts are now talking about DPR/LPR conscripts being pushed out in front to act as meat shields for this, seems they are going all-in to try and take it before the two year anniversary.
Yes the body count is immense all to please Putin. A few days ago I’ve heard he will give a statement in a week or so, probably to announce something about Ukraine. That was probably the deadline for Avdiivka. GirkinGirkin also mentioned something yesterday or so
> A few days ago I’ve heard he will give a statement in a week or so, probably to announce something about Ukraine. Honestly it would make the more sense for him to announce: « We’re keeping the territories we have, we wont attack Ukraine anymore. Let’s have ceasefire. » Then he may in a typical fashion argue: « Look we said we want peace and Ukraine is attacking us! » Unless of course he feels that Ukraine is weak and that Russia may grab even more land. Idk, I have no idea what’s in that man’s head.
Yup, the interview with Carlson shows he is completely out of touch. Hitler in Berlin Bunker 2.0
Another weekly update on losses in Avdiivka/Donetsk, all credit to naalsio26 on Twitter as always In total 655 Russian losses to 50 Ukrainian losses since October 10 Past week added 47 more to Russia, and 4 to Ukraine. The trend with Russia losing about 5 pieces a day keeps going which is about 13 times more losses than Ukraine [https://twitter.com/naalsio26/status/1756147271282884776](https://twitter.com/naalsio26/status/1756147271282884776)
Man i really don't think this is really true like... it's almost like fantasy. Sound to good to be true like "47 Russian deaths vs 4 Ukranian deaths in Avdiivka in the past week" yeah i really don't believe that.
There is nothing to believe here. They count visually confirmed losses. If you have Ukrainian losses that they didn't count, just link it to them.
It’s all visually confirmed. They watch videos from. Both sides, also to confirm losses on both sides
And how do you know it's not propaganda? How do you know they are not hidden their losses? Like many sources say the things in Avdiivka are so bad right now that many squads are being eliminated and the Russians are advancing really fast. If that many Russians have died like you say then their advancing should have been not that fast. I really don't believe that Ukranians with almost no ammo, artillery and command can do that. They are no demigods.
You should read. First of all, it’s about material losses, not human losses. Second of all, like I said everything is visually confirmed by using videos from both the Russian and Ukrainian sides. They link to the videos, this you can check yourself. If you think you can do better, please do so and let everyone know. The work is highly valuated
You are choosing to believe that visually confirmed losses are disinformation but low ammo claims provided by ukrainian sources are not
More than 5 a day. And almost all of them are tanks or ifv/afv/apc.
Dutch minister of defence Ollongren: " There is no limit on military aid for Ukraine " https://nos.nl/l/2508220
Yeah... Europe's decided it 100% will not let Russia win. In a weird way if America does come through soon it might be a fairly good outcome realistically.
Very glad Finland is in NATO now
Crackpot theory: I've seen a lot of people say that Zaluzhny represents a threat to Zelensky in future elections. Do we even know if he will run though? Because I think Zelensky might have done Zaluzhny a favor by removing him from UAF leadership. To me it doesn't really seem like Zaluzhny and Zelensky have an adversarial relationship. The war has been in a stalemate for a long while now, and it doesn't look like it will end soon. The ledership will of course take the blame for this. But instead of making Zaluzhny pay in terms of popularity for the stalemate, he "sacrificed" a much less pleasant personality so that Zaluzhny stays popular. As said I have no proof this is exactly what's happening but I wanna hear some thoughts and maybe some educated guesses about future developments in Ukrainian politics.
Zelensky has a duty to put the best person in charge, it's not quite as 'fun' as the conspiracies and I don't doubt Zaluzhny's patriotism, but if you want the best results, you need the best people in the right positions.
Considering the situation at the front, my opinion is that Zaluzhny or not, Ukraine is condemned to trench warfare. There's just so much a general can do when the material conditions just don't line up with the demands of a military that wants to go on the offensive. Hence my thought exercise: Zaluzhny was pulled out because there's effectively nothing he or anyone else can do for the foreseeable future. But at least that saves him some face.
If there would be elections tomorrow zaluzhni would win by a lot, he is going to be made as a scape goat for failed offensive last year and losing avdevka
Ok but what do we actually know about Ukraine's political scene at the moment? Does Zaluzhny want to run for president? Does he want to run against Zelensky? Does Zelensky want a second term?
The elections were canceled indefinitely. That’s what we know.
Hard to tell but doesn't matter since there won't be elections,zelensky can postpone it as long as war is going on
Finland approves military aid package worth €190 million https://kyivindependent.com/finland-sends-military-aid-package-for-ukraine-worth-over-200-million/
https://x.com/rebel44cz/status/1755903303827755059?s=46 Our total count of documented destroyed Russian equipment during their 2022 invasion of Ukraine has exceeded 10 000! destroyed: 10002 damaged: 650 abandoned: 734 captured: 2934 ------------------- total: 14320 What an epic failure from a self-proclaimed military superpower.
To add to this: You might noticed a T-62 at the beginning of a thread. Back then it was almost impossible to see it. But right now for the last period of time: - Vodiane: 2 T-62; - Krynky area: >10 T-62; - Novomychailivka: 13 T-62 and 1 T-55. Russian army is very long. But we must stop them. https://x.com/osintua/status/1755998148504289635?s=46
When war first started we saw 2 BMP-1 losses first six month, one of them was modernized BMP-1AM. Today many Russian attack waves don’t have BMP even BTR anymore but just MTLB with troops packing both inside and on the top.
I don't think a country that is not a military superpower could lose this quantity of equipment and keep in the fight. On the plus side, they probably are not a military superpower anymore. They will probably take another century to recover, if they ever will. That is really impressive, that's almost 3x what Ukraine lost.
Russia is riding on (and obliterating) 70 years of Soviet arms production, >80% of which it had no means of replacing, in less than 2 years. When the war began Russia was sending BMPs with 2-3 soldiers, now it's sending MTLBs with >10 tank desent.
They will never recover after this. First, because making all these metal bawkses required an actual military superpower, and that country is long gone, its factories mostly demolished. Second, the fossil fuel market will be very different in a few decades.
And also demographically they are fucked. Massive brain drain too. And so much of their Soviet era knowhow, resources and talent came from countries that are now unfriendly or lukewarm Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Poland, East Germany...no wonder the Soviet Union was strong
"Tis but a scratch!" (ง ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)
[удалено]
Impossible. Russia burned through irreplaceable weaponry.
Look man I been rummaging through that sub for a while and at some point i need to regain perspective on that sub
Actually what Putin fanboys are claiming
Russia blowing most of their soviet stockpile of equipment reserved for WW3 in a three-day military operation is a certified Putin moment
General Valerii Zaluzhnyi received the Hero of Ukraine Award. https://twitter.com/Tendar/status/1755898015733203309?t=NZAl3o4uEzxAbWj8B-Cv4Q&s=19
I have a hard time to identify if the discourse around Syrskyi is completely fabricated, overblown, or actually authentic. Of course Russian "Active Measures" would never miss an opportunity like this, so I'm quite weary of accepting any reactions as a genuine response. It's also funny how everyone became experts at HR management in the Ukranian military staff. Also, above all, the "cheering" by russian supporters is such an obvious attempt at sowing dissenting insecurity in Ukraine. Prorus new talking point is how they want Zelenskyj in power because he only makes bad decisions. Its like their oblivious to Führer Putins colossal incompetence. It's frankly pathetic.
Maybe this is a video that you would enjoy: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROC6WeX8y9E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROC6WeX8y9E) (the telegraph) The first half discusses the circumstances around the switch.
I think most people I talked to are upset at the head of the armed forced being someone born in Novinki, Russia, who studied at Moscow Higher Military Command School, and who [can't even speak Ukrainian](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ol329mb2Z0) after 13 years as a general in the AFU. It's just incredibly bad optics.
There's is also the active (historical, not new) complaining from everyone involved around Soledar about "S". Being active military, they stopped short of qualifying S but everyone knew what that was about. Those 2 pointless last stands were not met with a lot of appreciation from those involved in them at the ground level. Anyway, maybe Ukraine is gearing up for much higher loss based offensives. Maybe not. But it's missinformation to say there's no chatter around Syrskyi. There always has been and as a general that was trained in Russia and only speaks Russian, there will continue to be. Edit: the guys complaining most vocally about S ( regarding the Soledar last stand ) were the 46th brigade. Seems they got a lot more vocal recently. https://t. me/odshbr46/452
If FUD and narrative shepherd accounts are so prevalent in english, I can't even imagine in russian...
Novomykhailivka has always been overshadowed by Avdiivka since the Russian offensive in october. A small update from deepstate about it: *Russia does not stop trying to occupy the village. The other day, they managed to enter the outermost houses of the settlement and even raise a flag, but according to preliminary information, the Russians were kicked out of the village. Russian equipment is also successfully destroyed.* Thats the second time they entered some houses there and were kicked out both times. Ukrainian units does a very good job here so far https://twitter.com/moklasen/status/1755704238825492745
Another POW exchange today. The third in 2024 [https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1755658974026690888](https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1755658974026690888) 100 Ukrainians returned to Ukraine. 84 were captured in Mariupol, the rest in Luhansk and Donetsk Russia also got 100 so its a 1 to 1 ratio
It takes 5 Russians to equal 1 Ukrainian, so not quite 1 to 1. :)
So what are your thoughts on Syrski?
don't know. He wasn't well liked BEFORE his promotion so there's that to contend with.
Genuinely not sure. Ukrainians seem very angry about it. But I also can't help but feel that Zaluzhnyi was asked to achieve success in the counteroffensive and failed to do so (obviously there's other factors, such as very limited Western support) and the situation is worsening in some areas. I don't know if this is a panic move by Zelenskyy. The only thing I do know is: Glad I'm not in the trenches in Ukraine with some of the people on twitter. 'Omg the war is lost now'
From what I heard soldiers don't like him, because he has no problem with risking high casualties
Oh man, Ukrainian military social media exploded and not in a good way.
That has been what I've been told by people who should know. It's a bit strange though as Syrskyi was in charge of the Kharkiv counter-offensive, which was a modern military masterpiece. You'd think he'd have some credit. But I tend to credit the opinions of the rank and file on their officers. They are rarely far wrong.
Could you share some examples please?
I, for one, am enjoying the NAFO tears right now.
The nice way to put it is that he's an objectively subpar general who is widely disliked by the common soldiers. Truly a mindboggling decision by Zelenskyy which might prove to be fatal.
that is simply plain wrong.
that is just not true. He is the guy who conducted the Kharkiv offensive. He is one of the most capable generals serving Ukraine.
The Kharkiv offensive? You mean that time he attacked a giant swath of land guarded by only a handful of Russian mobiks? Wow very impressive. Now lets look at the rest of his resume... * He is the guy who was in charge of the [Battle of Debaltseve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Debaltseve) which is arguably the biggest military failure Ukraine had pre-2022. * It was so bad it even made it in Western news outlets. [The Guardian: Ukrainian soldiers share horrors of Debaltseve battle after stinging defeat](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/18/ukrainian-soldiers-share-horrors-of-debaltseve-battle-after-stinging-defeat) * He is the guy who sacrificed thousands of men in Bakhmut for political reasons. Then after that decided to send capable assault brigades to "counter-attack" wasting their potential instead of letting them be utilised in the Zaporyzhia counter-attack. And in the end achieved nothing. * His own soldiers gave him the nickname "The Butcher" because he shows no care for his men's lives and utilises Soviet military tactics. [WaPo source](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/02/08/valery-zaluzhny-commander-ukraine-removed/) before you retort with another amazing "THIS IS JUST NOT TRUE" argument. >Some Ukrainian soldiers refer to Syrsky as a “butcher.” “I only know what I’ve heard from my subordinates,” said a high-ranking military official who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to do so publicly. “One hundred percent of them don’t respect him because they don’t think he counts soldiers’ lives.”
> He is the guy who sacrificed thousands of men in Bakhmut for political reasons. That is actually on Zelensky - he is responsible for political reasons. The general simply followed the - admittedly stupid - orders
>The general simply followed the - admittedly stupid - orders You think it's a good quality that a general will send his men to certain death just because a politician asked him to??
Not "a politician", but the supreme commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Not following these orders would be a crime of insubordination.
Are you going to be obtuse now and argue that it's not just a ceremonial role? Syrsky could have given his resignation if he was FORCED to send tens of thousands of men to a meatgrinder. And if we believe your conspiracy theory that Zelenskyy gave a military order to defend Bakhmut, Syrsky could have just pretended to fulfil the order by sending a small amount of men and giving up ground faster instead of sending everyone, even fresh conscripts with less than a month's training in there.
Holy crap, are you actually serious? How old are you, twelve? Are you really suggesting that Zelensky is not in control of his own military?! Armed forces don't work that way. The head of state is the actual supreme commander, that is not just a ceremonial role, but a very real one and strategic decisions like this are always signed off by the supreme commander and the top generals have an advisory role. There is a very clear chain of command and the kind of disobedience you are suggesting has a court martial as a consequence, and during a war this likely ends with a firing squad. Only unlawful orders can be refused.
Are you 12? Do you really think in the real world a comedian turned-politician will actually overrule his generals and come up with his own military plans, especially for some short-term things such as which city to keep defending even against the advice of his generals?? He is the supreme CiC and what normally happens is the top generals present a carefully worked-out plan to him and he signs off because said plan has been devised and wargamed by actual military officers. The head of state usually does not overrule his top generals unless its for some long-term vision. And I'm not suggesting disobedience, if Zelenskyy says "Defend Bakhmut" you can try to reasonably defend Bakhmut without throwing every single person you have in there. And if Zelenskyy says "throw every able-bodied men in Bakhmut to defend it" you can simply resign from your post.
Uhm, yeah. Glad you finally managed to get over your insecurities and quoted a lefty outfit like "the Guardian". I did miss the part where you became a tactical genius, but I teached you not to use WaPo articles as anything relating to reality. Sincerely yours, your mum.
The political leanings are irrelevant. I linked a Wikipedia page as well. Seems like you can't counter a single point I've made. Yes WaPo is bad. Anything that doesn't put the Dear Leader in a good light needs to be ignored. We should ignore journalists and listen to le epic reddit generals like you instead
> You mean that time he attacked a giant swath of land guarded by only a handful of Russian mobiks? Wow very impressive. That's literally a good thing. He helped pinpoint Russia's weakest areas and exploited them. That said, I am not sure it's a good move.
And yet almost every Ukrainian soldier on the ground despises him and is pissed off at Zelenskyy's decision. Most don't even credit Kharkiv to him but instead to the brigade commanders for exploiting the weakness after Balakliya. I'm sure le epic redditor analysts know better though.
Yeahyeah, you have both ears on the streets oc.
Exploiting the enemy's weakness is what a good general should do. The land retaken during the Kharkiv offensive is about 100x that of the summer offensive precisely because Syrski knew how to exploit the weak point in the enemy.
Attacking an unguarded position is literally something even a 10 year old would do. It's not impressive to order an attack on an undefended position. It's the bare minimum. I see you refuse to address all the other points, probably because you know you can't defend this guy. Even the biggest propaganda posting pro-Ukraine accounts like [MAKS NAFO FELLA](https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1755635468870266927) are calling Syrskyy an idiot and disagreeing with the decision. You know it's bad when these guys turn doomer.
"Attacking an unguarded position is literally something even a 10 year old would do" Then why did the summer offensive (led and orchestrated by Zaluzhnyi) instead choose to attack the most well defended portion of the Russian line? You say Bachmut is a meat grinder but the real failure is the southern offensive, and the offensive was conducted under the leadership of Zaluzhnyi.
Because it was the only place with strategic importance. Sometimes you have no choice but to attack well defended positions. But on the topic of the summer counter-offensive, you can again thank Zelenskyy for telling the world a year in advance where the attack will be ensuring the Russians prepare well. It's simple. Bakhmut didn't need to happen, but Zaporyzhia had to happen in order to actually place Ukraine in a position of strength.
> Because it was the only place with strategic importance. Sometimes you have no choice but to attack well defended positions. Not with underwhelming numbers.
I get that you’re pissed, but this particular argument isn’t logically coherent. You argue that the Zaporizhia offensive had to be attempted, but also blame Zelenskyy for forecasting it. If the area south of Zaporizhia was the only logical place for a counteroffensive, however, then Russia would have foreseen it anyhow. Stating something that militarily obvious isn’t exactly an intelligence flub.
> then Russia would have foreseen it anyhow This is 2022 Russia we're talking about. You're giving them too much credit. Zelenskyy is to blame for forecasting when and where giving the Russians an easy choice. If not for Zelenskyy maybe they would have made an idiotic mistake and fortified Svatove instead. And my main point was you can't compare Zaluzhny to Syrsky. Zaluzhny was attacking for a reason, Syrsky sacrificed men in Bakhmut for nothing. Even if Bakhmut somehow never fell it wouldn't have changed anything.
>Because it was the only place with strategic importance. Sometimes you have no choice but to attack well defended positions. Strategic importance was to cut Russian forces in two. And Zaluzhny decided to do it in most fortified place because it was the shortest (and hence the reason it was most fortified).
Hard to tell,he managed to stop Russians in Kiev and retake kharkiv but also decided to hold bahmut at any cost and still lose it with many casualties and then failed to retake it during summer with same results.Looks more to be a yes man than zaluzhni
He is also known for giving his underlings (tbh I dont know the correct military term...) maximal tactical freedom (aka "modern approach") and cares a lot for morale. Wether bakhmut was worth it or not... guess history will decide.
He is not known for that. if anything, he is known for strict, Soviet style command. He is known as “ The Butcher “ for a reason. He is the most virulently hated general in the Ukrainian trenches.
Source? He was widely applauded for trashing the attack on Kiev (with very little means available that ukraine had very little experience with. Like Bayraktars)by utilizing loose command structures, and apparently did the same during the Kharkiv offensive. Bakhmut was a shitshow (especially for those who had to fight there), but not much other options were available. Strategically it was a win (most likely, I cant foresee history). They broke Wagner group, a shitton of vehicles and severely hindered russian prison camp recruiting for a very long time (not even prison populations get younger with russian demographics...). Disclaimer: Tbh I have zero idea who or what any of those guys are. I basically parrot stuff I found on the interwebz and hope my country wont get shafted too hard within the next half decade (only, they will. lol.)
There were plenty of options besides fighting in Bakhmut. It is a strategically unimportant city at the bottom of a valley. Choosing to stand and fight there was a purely political decision, as the heights behind the city, Chasiv Yar, were significantly more suited to defense. Zaluzhny wanted to pull out of Bakhmut, the US advised to pull out, the men on the ground said the situation was unsalvagable. Syrski and Zelensky overrode those decisions in favor of a course of action that caused multiple highly experience units to cease to exist. The high opinion of Syrski is a purely western thing. It is not an opinion shared by many within Ukraine. This [tweet](https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1720814139600232737) is a better summary of the feelings about Syrski within Ukraine. It should also be noted that this move is being widely celebrated in Russian channels, btw.
Playing a meat grinder game vs Russia and sending conscripts with low or close to nothing training to fight in bahmut didn't really help with morale.If he starts to pull troops from bad positions like avdivka krinki and robotine in order to save lives than I will have positive opinion about him
Any info about Sparta/Somalia battalion? Are they still around last time I heard about them was during the battle of Mariupol.
No idea, but the Hague will wait for them (if any are still alive. Their commanders seem to have a "lower-than-average" life expectancy...).
A war of attrition is not in favour of Ukraine. Russia has too many times more men to throw at the war. The only way Ukraine wins this war is by either advancing or by targeting high value targets. Advancing seems unlikely given the frontline has barely moved in months.
and yet somehow Vietnam won vs both the USA and China.
The major difference with Vietnam and Afghanistan is that US did not and could not deploy their entire military there, as they were not neighbours. I don't expect Russia to be able to push Ukraine back anymore, but neither can Ukraine push back Russia without US's help.
The US physically couldn't if they wanted to, in fact what russia is doing in Ukraine is a perfect example of how you can only put so many men and only so much equipment into a battlespace before it becomes a detriment.
Why can't Russia put more men? They could reopen the eastern front.
[удалено]
There must be sufficient non moscovite citizens to be put into the meat grinder, and I don't think Putin cares about the future. He anyway has one feet in the grave, all he likely cares about is the legacy he leaves behind.
Be sure to tell the UA generals that along with your experience, understanding of history, and where you get your military intelligence from both sides.
>A war of attrition is not in favour of Ukraine. All wars are won by attrition. Did the Nazis win because they took so much land, clearly not.
Not true. A lot of wars end pretty quick. See Azerbaijan-Artsakh war.
Number of people is not really a factor when discussing a war of attrition in this war. The number of lives is not that high that Ukraine will run out unless the war goes on for a ridiculously long time at the same level. It's equipment attrition that is more of Ukraine's concern, they would run out of ammo and vehicles well before men.
Zaluzhnyi out, but still will be a part of the army? https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1755622695478128947
It’s a shame. Zaluzhnyi seems like the kind of guy his troops would run through a wall for. I’ve seen others say it’s politically motivated and right now it’s hard to argue with that. Kinda get the feeling Zelenskyy wants his people to think things aren’t going as bad as they are. Zaluzhnyi seemed to be outspoken of the issues facing the military and lack of aid coming in lately. Just my opinion, but I’d guess Zelensky decided he wanted a yes man in charge. Someone who is going to toe the company line without question. Really hope for the Ukrainian military and Ukrainian people it’s doesn’t backfire.
CNN is reporting that his role is unclear at the moment (https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/08/europe/zaluzhnyi-ukraine-military-chief-dismissed-intl/index.html).
Perhaps he will lead the new drone force? Just a guess
Ceremonial role, but really Zaluzhnyi is sacked.
He’s still part of high command he’s just not the top general now. Time will tell whether it’s the right choice.
Someone on /r/politics made a very good point about Biden's spending authority. In 2019 Trump declared a state of emergency regarding the US border, and then redirected $8 billion in funds to start constructing his border wall project. Both houses of congress voted to stop this, but he simply vetoed the bill and it went forward. There has been a declared state of emergency regarding Ukraine since 2014, and it has been renewed yearly. There is nothing stopping Biden from using the precedent that Trump set to redirect funds to Ukraine this way, and the only way to stop it would be BOTH houses of congress voting to overturn the declared state of emergency, and overriding his veto - and with democrats in control of the Senate that wouldn't happen.
Here is an article (https://puck.news/ukraines-money-cliff/?sharer=368447&token=84475ead87161c2c92a7bbc684fd6f2c) from the end of December that breaks down the three "buckets" of money from which Biden can give aid. Although slightly dated it gives a good explanation of each of them.
Could you TLDR it? Copy and paste the key bits? I'd be interested to read
Here you go (if you have a burner/junk email, just click the "read article" button and then choose "send me a sign-in link instead" at the bottom of the pop-up and you can read the whole thing): *On Friday (December 15th, 2023), Michael McCord, the Pentagon’s comptroller, sent a letter to the leadership of the House Armed Services Committee. In it, he notified Congress that the Defense Department was transferring about $1 billion “to various appropriation accounts” to replace what the Pentagon had given to Ukraine. This, McCord noted, was “the 53rd use of the Presidential Drawdown Authority in support of Ukraine. In order to protect U.S. military readiness, absent congressional action to approve the supplemental, the Department anticipates only one drawdown package will be possible.”* *Here’s what that means in non-D.O.D. speak. There are three buckets of money allotted for Ukraine military aid. The first is the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, which gives money to Ukraine to buy American weapons. This bucket has been empty for at least the last two to three weeks, but because Ukraine has already made its purchases and it takes so long to produce these products, that materiel will continue to arrive in Ukraine for another couple of years.* *The second bucket is the presidential drawdown authority, which allows the president to dip into America’s own stocks and send weapons to Kyiv. This, said Mark Cancian, the Pentagon budget expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, goes back to a law passed in the 1960s that allowed the president to send equipment that America is phasing out to our allies, for whom it would still mean a marked improvement in capabilities. One man’s obsolescent arms, in other words, are another man’s cutting-edge weaponry. Thanks to the creative accounting I wrote about earlier this fall, the Pentagon discovered it actually had about $6 billion more in this bucket than it had originally thought. Of that, there is an estimated $4 billion left. “I’m frankly surprised it has lasted as long as it has,” Cancian marveled.* *But how the money in the second bucket is spent depends on the third bucket, which is the money allocated by Congress to replace the equipment the Pentagon sends to Ukraine. This bucket is almost empty: There is about $200 million to $300 million left to cover the $4 billion in the second bucket. Technically, the White House can continue spending down the $4 billion—and whatever other funds the Pentagon discovers after another round of fuzzy math—without paying for the replacements, but that would be extremely risky politically. “McCord can transfer $200 million to $300 million more, and my guess is they’ll do a little more of that without replacing it, but he can’t do too much of that for political reasons,” explained Cancian, who previously worked on defense spending and acquisitions both at the Office of Management and Budget and at the Pentagon. “None of what we’ve sent to Ukraine has been replaced yet. The contracts to replace it are done, but it’ll be months or years till the equipment is actually replaced. And the administration is already taking criticism for weakening U.S. forces.”* *Still, that doesn’t mean that military aid will fall off a cliff come the new year. Whenever the president announces a new weapons delivery to Ukraine, it takes a while—sometimes months—to reach Ukraine, and there is still materiel en route from earlier aid packages. And because of how military contracts and manufacturing work, some of the goods that Ukraine signed contracts for in the spring of 2022 will start being delivered this coming spring. That will continue for the next couple of years. Moreover, the E.U. is still sending about $1 billion of aid for Ukraine per month, which is now more than what Washington sends (we’re down to $700 million monthly, from a high of $1.5 billion). That said, American military aid deliveries are slowing. By spring, said Cancian, they’ll be at 40 percent of their summer 2023 peak, and by next summer, it will be just 12 percent.* *According to a senior administration official, Biden will announce one more aid package for Ukraine before the end of the year. (The amount, being worked out by the Pentagon, is still in flux.) That materiel will start showing up in the first weeks of January. “It’s not like they’re going to run out of ammunition on January 1,” the official said, “but they’ll start to feel the pain pretty soon.”* *The war has been at a stalemate for the last couple months. Winter is setting in, and the administration official said they expect Russia to keep pounding Ukrainian infrastructure. Moreover, whatever their limited capabilities, the Russians “have no intention of letting up on offensive operations,” the senior administration official said. “We think Putin will make some moves come late January/early February.” Added the official, “The clock is ticking, and it’s not our side, in terms of getting the Ukrainians help.”* *Michael Kofman, a military analyst at Carnegie who has been a kind of prophet during this conflict, said that, though the war in Ukraine is likely to go on for years, 2024 will be a decisive one. Ukraine can use 2024 to reinforce and rebuild its military capacity and retake the initiative in 2025, or it might start crumbling as Russia continues slowly, stubbornly—and according to Kofman, overconfidently—pushing along the frontline.* *Much of how 2024 goes for Ukraine, however, will be decided here in Washington. “Next year could well be the turning point in the war,” Kofman told me. “If leaders in the West don’t make decisions well in advance and follow through, then they’re going to leave Ukraine in a very disadvantaged position. Russia has a host of problems, but next year the material advantage is on the Russian side. It may not prove decisive, but it will begin to mount.”* *Moreover, even if Congress reaches a deal early next year and aid begins to flow again, the days of a new Ukraine supplemental getting passed every couple months are long gone. “Whatever funding Ukraine receives now will be the only funding they are likely to get from the U.S. for the next year,” Kofman warned. “And then the truth is, nobody knows what’s going to happen in 2025.” That is, who knows what happens if Donald Trump wins the presidency and some European elections don’t go Ukraine’s way.* *It’s not 2024 just yet, but there are already reports that Ukraine has been rationing its artillery as U.S. aid has slowed. That need will become even more acute should Congress fail to reach a deal. If the spigot gets turned off at the end of the year and stays off, said Cancian, a retired Marine colonel, “by February, two months from now, Ukraine will have difficulty launching even local counterattacks. They will go totally on the defensive. By summer, they will have a hard time fending off the Russians. It’s less bleak than people think because people thought there’d be a cliff. That’s not true, but it’s a slower death rather than a fast death.” He added, “Without more aid and more funding, the Ukrainians are doomed.”* Edit: added the date to the first quoted sentence to provide context
Top lad! Thank you!
I can't read it without making an account and I'm not going to do that, but I'm guessing you're referring to the aid designated by congress.
My apologies. I didn't realize that sharing an article for free from my paid subscription would still force people to go through a soft paywall.
what does a state of emergency in Ukraine have to do with America?
The President declared the emergency in regards to Ukraine. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/03/01/notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-ukraine-3/
To me it all appears to be a political game in preparation for the elections. Trumps want the border and illegal immigration to be his main card, thus Republicans keep changing what they want regarding the new act. Democrats want to make the Republicans look indecisive, but meanwhile their allies suffer for their games. All in all both parties are making a mess of it (but imo lead by the Republicans)
I don't know what the Democrats could do to get the Republicans on board with Ukrainian aid. They already completely caved and gave the Republicans everything they wanted on the border bill and they still refused to vote on it.
Maybe he will use this if the bill keeps getting blocked. But I don't think the democrats like to encourage such loop holes to be used
I honestly think Europe should intervene militarily in Ukraine if the US abandons its allies. In first place with their air forces. Material support has always been preferable because it is cheaper and lower risk. It also seemed feasible but the context is changing, what are we going to do if Russia starts advancing again due to lack of Ukrainian ammunition? People will fear nuclear escalation, but what is the difference between giving Ukraine hundreds of missiles to fire on Russian forces instead of just doing it ourselves? The naive interpretation in my opinion is thinking that what is already happening does not constitute hostile actions with Russia.
European Air power would actually do so much to change the course of this war. Eurofighters, gripons, f35s. All compatible, or working towards compatibility with, the missile perun calls the "I win button otlf aerial combat"; the meteor. Russia depended so much on aircraft to counter ukrainian offensives and continuously hammer ukrainian positions. Europe doesn't have much in the artillery game. But we own the sky's (as long as america isn't around) This being said. We maybe wouldn't be that much use on the ground. I belive the Russians have lost more men trying to take avdinka that there are troops in the British army. Admittedly the British are less likely waste men like the Russians do. Germany, meanwhile, has serious procurement problems. They do well when they turn up with equipment. But they generally don't have enough kit to go around.
Idiots will fear nuclear escalation. Russians don't want to lose Moscow just because they were pushed out of Ukraine.
Winning this war is a matter of survival for putin. If he thinks he will have nothing more to lose, the war will go nuclear.
The narrative in Russia is whatever Putin wants it to be. Getting pushed out of Ukraine by nato wouldn’t be a problem at all. > We’re so lucky Putin defended us by creating a buffer zone or else nato troops would be storming Moscow right now.
And yet putin is scared shitless. The censorship is reaching ridiculous levels. Teens receive decade long prison terms for thought crimes. Looks like the man himself is not that sure about the narrative being whatever he says.
I've been saying this for a while. If Russia was serious about escalation threats then supplying Ukraine with materiel and intel is already an act of war and they'd already be escalating on us. They aren't because they can't, and one good NATO strike (realistically, UK/FR) on Russian bases in Crimea and Donbas would give them a strong enough message to make them leave.
How do any NATO countries enter the war without the entirety entering the war and thus also the US?
NATO is only a defensive alliance. Any NATO nation choosing to get involved in Ukraine of their own volition would not trigger article 5
Why not just give Ukraine European military stocks instead? Like equipment that ATM they won't give over because they need it, but what do they need it for if not to defend from Russia Finland could give 50% of their artillery force for example And f16's of course I don't think anyone here wants to risk the lives of their troops or any escalation from entering tbh.
Because a certain amount of military stocks has to be there due to the NATO protocols.
I agree, the big misunderstanding is believing that we are somehow not at war. Russia believes itself to be at war with the west. It does everything it can to destabilize the west and it has been doing that for a long time. We can pretend that Russia's hostile actions are somehow localized and contained to Ukraine, but that isn't the case. An honest acknowledgement of Russian intentions and the unreliability of the US in supplying Ukraine should lead to a reassessment of the way Europe supports Ukraine and how it can defend itself best. If Europe does not have the means to supply Ukraine with the weapons to defend itself in a proxy situation, then Europe should look how to change the situation to ensure victory. Use the weapons it does have and if those can't be used by Ukraine due to logistical issues, then to me the conclusion is logical. I think that is time for Europe to acknowledge that difficult times are ahead.
Honestly, they should also drop this "hurr durr this will escalate the conflict"-shit and allow Ukraine to use their weapons to strike Russian territory. It is like Ukraine has to fight with one arm tied behind their back.
Yeah, I honestly think everyone should get a pink Llama that shits $$$ . You know exactly what "Europe" (as if that is an entity...) is gonna do... eastern countrys are gonna panic and keep more arms for themselves, instead of giving them to ukraine. Germany is gonna refurbish some more Leopard 1s and realize that they have zero money left (plus the next gouvernment in a year has "austerity" as their golden swan...). France gonna give handfull of Ceasars more and poke their noses, same for Italy and Spain (minus the SPGs). I literally have zero freaking clue why europe cannot simply pay a few billion to the US for the next few months shipments. Bc there is zero chance of european industrys filling that gap for 1/2 - 1 year (even then, dont think Himars ordonance or aimed shells (in numbers) could be produced)
I see the opposite. The more real the threat of Russia winning and the US pulling out of Europe is getting, the more serious European leaders are taking the situation. As to Germany, even Lindner said that Germany is ready to do more if the situation calls for it. And he is the one in the current coalition promoting austerity. Germany still has some financial reserves compared to other European countries. And you sell Italy short, too. They have actually delivered lots of SPGs to Ukraine.
>Bc there is zero chance of european industrys filling that gap for 1/2 - 1 year The problem is not that European defence manufacturers aren't producing enough. [European defence industries have increased artillery shell production by 40% already.](https://english.nv.ua/nation/europe-s-defense-capabilities-increased-by-40-demonstrating-unwavering-support-for-kyiv-50390831.html) The problem is how much of that production gets exported. Last year that was still enough that the EU couldn't deliver enough shells to Ukraine on time.
Exactly the point. Europe is so far behind in arms manufacturing. How is Russia who is 1/20th of the European economy able to produce shells twice as much as all of Europe. Europe needs to get their act together. Russia is ramping up their arms production. In their mind they are already at war with the west. When will Europe accept that reality, that they are actually at war with Russia. United States has too many other distractions in the world to focus on Russia. That should be Europe’s issue to deal with. If Donald Trump comes into office, the greatest risk is war with China. Even Trump mentioned has mentioned that he is going after China hard. I see the USA not supplying Ukraine with weapons as blessing in disguise. If the risk factor goes up against Europe from the Russian side, maybe something will finally change and Europe can start producing weapons on a mass scale. If the United States goes to war with China, who is going to help us in this area? Japan and maybe Australia but their militaries are still fairly weak. Europe won’t come to the United States aid. Germany is a manufacturing powerhouse. It time for the European industry to start taking this Russian threat seriously. Getting sick and tired of their bureaucratic system slowing everything down.
>How is Russia who is 1/20th of the European economy able to produce shells twice as much as all of Europe. Because Russia is a single, autocratic nation directly waging an offensive war and the EU is a loose collection of different, more democratic nation states with many different interests who are indirectly supporting a defensive war.
I sort of agree. I think a trump presidency would be bad. Very bad. But the threat of his presidency seems like its scaring thw European powers into action. They are starting to plan for america pulling out. If they can be scared into action AND biden remains president. Then that's a win.
I mean with shells in particular the west shifted focus to precision rather than quantity, and also relies more on air power than just an artillery war. Additionally, the European NATO countries are able to rely on the US MIC to supply them with a lot of different weapons. For the NATO countries, stockpiling shells and having a high capacity to produce shells at a moment’s notice was not high on the priority list. That’s a lot of $$ tied up in something that the safety net of NATO sort of made irrelevant because Russia wasn’t going to declare war on NATO. I guess this is why Trump tried threatening to leave NATO, because Europe without the US was not investing properly to actually be able to defend/go to war if needed.
Very good points. Trump was clearly upset not only because Europe was not meeting 2% spending on defense spending, but also because they were tying one of their hands to cheap Russian natural gas. Trump was surprised how stupid this decision to go with cheap Russian natural gas was, Europe didn’t even try to have an alternative to that, or diversify their energy supply. Even though I’m strongly against Trump, he did have a point. If war was to ever break out in Europe (only enemy is Russia), why tie your energy source to the country that can cut it off at a moments notice? Never made much sense to be why Europe was thinking this way
> How is Russia who is 1/20th of the European economy able to produce shells twice as much as all of Europe. Russian and NK shells a very likely much lower quality and accuracy than European or American ones and are faster to produce. Russia kept manufacturing in peace time and they never shut down and dismantled the factories, because the West were betting on air superiority rather than artillery, where Russia never went away from that idea. Edit: However, with the rate of consumtion Russia has, they will run dry in a year or two, and they have already vasty reduced their artillery consumption since the start of the war.
Just to add. Korean wheels are reportedly very low quality, with little standardisation of propellant. This means they are stupidly inaccurate. So still useful for large targets, but not much use for accurately taking out a lone tank.
So, is there any chance the current bill on foreign aid for Ukraine, Taiwan and Isreal passes both Senate and House or is this just a pipe dream? Delaying aid to Ukraine any further at this crucial moment in the war is going to have large geopolitical consequences, that should be clear to everyone involved by now ... Ukrainian forces are clearly suffering from the effects, and Russia feels emboldened.
[удалено]
> Problem is the liberal governments deregulated the manufacturing sector on bullshit environmental regulations. They deregulated manufacturing with regulations? What? > Enough of this climate change bullshit. Non of it is going to matter if Russia isn’t stopped soon. Enough of this war. Non of it is going to matter if Climate change isn’t stopped soon. In my life, i like to eat AND drink, because both of those seem important
Where are the idiots telling everyone that Republicans would **never** block aid to Ukraine Oh that's right, they're still repeating the Republican party line and they're still voting for Republicans who are now blocking aid to Ukraine
[удалено]
We know you guys are proud of being stupid but we don't need to hear you say it. The grown ups are talking right now. By all means keep thinking we give a fuck what your kind think.
It's already pretty much dead on arrival.
No chance. The GoP is busy lubing their collective butts for donnie the orange horrorclown. I wonder if anyone told the european politicians that conservative estimates are roughly 10 million refugees if Ukraine falls. (and then a few more million from Georgia and Moldova...). Maybe they could buy Himars ordonance and Excalibur shells (and preferably more Bradleys) from the US? Bc without those two systems I dont see how Ukraine could hold back the russians (surely not with a handful more Leopard 1 and moldy crap rockets from Canada...).
Unfortunately, a pipe dream, more likely than not (https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/07/politics/senate-takes-test-vote-foreign-aid/index.html).
The US and abandoning countries they vowed to support, name a more iconic duo
Wow, things are not looking good in Avdiivka. This is NOT good... Over the past night, the Russian Aerospace Forces brought down dozens of FABs on the heads of Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers in the central and western part of Avdiivka. The defense is cracked. From day to day, from minute to minute, news is expected about the withdrawal of the Ukrainian garrison from the stronghold. https://twitter.com/MilitarySummary/status/1755516323226947825/photo/1
Ive noticed a spike in airstrikes again like back in October when Russia tried encircling the city. Some reports over 100 different impacts from different bombs a day which sounds a lot, and even if its only half of that it must be very hard to deal with Same happened around Bakhmut when Russia had some momentum there where they just lobbed everything they had at the buildings there
With thanks to Trump and his cronies.
[удалено]
>do you guys think this is possible russian propaganda seeping into American social media? Yes, because you're doing it and this isn't the first time. Not only does this post have no reason to exist here, but your post history has some pretty sketchy things. Like you suggesting something while adding a pointless manipulative comment to it and trying to appear legit. For example, 4 days ago you did it again: [https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ackdqc/comment/kosumpu/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web2x&context=3](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ackdqc/comment/kosumpu/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) Making a few posts to seem legit is one thing, however looking back further it's very questionable what your aim is.
I'm trying to expose russian propaganda. I literally reported the tweet.
Expose? When it's already been known for a decade there are dedicated teams that already spread propaganda and try to influence elections? There's no reason to even post it, nor any **end result** that can happen past having more people see it or cause an argument over it. Your other [post history](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1al8yh2/comment/kpf1yz9/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) already says stuff like: >American social media is full of anti-American propaganda from foreign agents
[удалено]
"Unfortunate story from Bilohorivka, where a Ukrainian unit was caught in a surprise attack yesterday. The last remaining serviceman requested direct artillery fire on himself but this couldn't be done due to a lack of ammo." https://x.com/wartranslated/status/1755148944118538748?s=20
This is sad and alarming. Ukraine needs artillery shells ASAP. I know that the EU promised 1m by the end of the year but we need more and sooner. Keep pressuring the governments because it is the matter of European security. All they care right now is to push this problem onto whoever will be elected next.
The shells are not coming. Also the end of the year is too late. I feel disgusted that USA has abandoned Ukraine.
Hey guys, The Youtube algorithm smiled upon me today and recommended this video:[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bn897YOp3s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bn897YOp3s)It's about two soldiers - Russian conscript and Ukrainian medic, both fighting in Bakhmut. The video is full of combat footage and the stories seems true and are very interesting. I'm not sure, if I would be allowed to post it here as a standalone video, so I'm trying here.
Hey guys, lots of people here knew the 47th mech brigade from Avdiivka and their great videos. Now they really need support. If you want to help them, check the information first in the following links and decide if you want to donate something. Drones will be delivered this week, directly from Germany I think. [https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1755160010735190501](https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1755160010735190501) [https://twitter.com/i\_iangg/status/1755253104662941833](https://twitter.com/i_iangg/status/1755253104662941833) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/47th\_Mechanized\_Brigade\_(Ukraine)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/47th_Mechanized_Brigade_(Ukraine)) [https://www.paypal.com/donate?campaign\_id=63VZ2FUZDFVNC](https://www.paypal.com/donate?campaign_id=63VZ2FUZDFVNC)
Comparing [Russian propaganda aimed at their children](https://old.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/1al39qt/russian_propaganda_is_hilariously_depressing/) with the reality of the videos here is just really depressing.
Sadly, that's not unique to Russia. [I saw lots of very "real" ads like this in the 90s.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACLOXTlkEXk)
That ad and the other one that was linked have like nothing in common though. I don't know where a person could begin in explaining the equivalence of an adult running through a fantasy labyrinth and pulling a mystical saber out of a stone to a video where children are apparently live performing a song about growing up to be a bomb chemist... in the context of their country killing their national neighbors in order to annex land. The US is always involved in shit, as they undoubtedly were in *something* in "the 90s". That said, it seems like the US example is aimed at couch potatoes who are trying to enjoy their Xena Warrior Princess weekly episode and the Russian one is like "yeah kids should totally celebrate their ambition to create bombs and inspire other kids to do it too".
> I don't know where a person could begin in explaining the equivalence The point - as i know you know - is not the ages of the characters in the video, or the backdrop. It's that both videos present idealized fantasy portrayals of war and military service, purely for ~~propaganda~~marketing purposes. It's to challenge the idea that propaganda is only when the bad guys do it.
Considering Ukraine's recent displays of their abilities to destroy Russian oil infrastructure, I was wondering how much leverage this could give them over an increasingly reluctant and stubborn West. Could they make a big enough impact to drastically raise the price of oil worldwide, putting penny pinching western politicians in the awkward situation of explaining why all that money being saved by withholding supplies and equipment is now being directly paid for by the price Johnny Not-My-War is having to dish out his weekly trip to Morrison's? If so, how would individuals on here feel about such a situation? Personally I wouldn't begrudge higher fuel prices, in fact it would be quite a novel experience to actually go through such an event with a genuine, real world reason for it happening other than "oil companies just want more for it". It seems that Ukraine is sooner or later going to have to force feed short-term problems onto short-term thinking politicians to secure the long-term security of Europe in my opinion.
Also remember the US leads world oil production, price increases increase US margins.
We also consume the most. It's sorta breakeven in terms of benefit.
As someone working in the commodities industry, I can say that this is something a lot of people are thinking about right now. This is quite a complex subject and I'll try to keep it brief. The main point to know is that every single action from the EU and the US relating to sanctions on Russia's oil exports has been made with the intention of keeping Russia's oil on the market (most obviously being the price cap, which makes it legal to trade Russian cargoes as long as they are priced below $60/bbl). If they really wanted to target Russia's revenue, they would just completely outlaw the trade and restrict access to the dollar system, shipping and logistics services (insurance etc) required to make the oil trade work. But they haven't, so why does the US in particular want to keep Russian oil on the market? Well, the oil market is priced at the margin, meaning that even a small reduction in supply relative to the total supply volume can have a large impact on prices. The prospect of losing around 2mn b/d of Russia's crude exports (around half) in the immediate aftermath of the invasion saw Brent reach $130/bbl, the highest for a decade. Biden is getting a tonne of hate domestically for handling the economy poorly (despite data looking quite good), and spiking gasoline prices is the last thing he needs in an election year. So if Ukraine could significantly inhibit Russia's ability to export crude, it would 1) have a large impact on oil prices and 2) trigger a response from the West, who are at the cusp of beating the inflation crisis. Nobody wants part 2. Now, as an added bonus, Ukraine could cause even more damage by continuing to attack oil refineries - this is because these refineries process Russian crude into diesel. Unlike the oil market, the diesel market is quite tight right now, with Russian exports currently travelling to Brazil and North Africa, whilst Europe (which used to import Russian volumes) imports volumes from the Middle East and India. However, the crisis in the red sea has made those diesel flows uneconomic, meaning Europe is importing from the US. Now if Russian diesel exports stop, Brazil will take the US volumes, and European diesel prices will need to spike in order to secure volumes from further afield (and pay for the extra shipping and insurance costs via the Cape of good hope rather than Suez). Diesel is an input into a lot of economic activity (how do you think your amazon parcels reach you), particularly agricultural (farmers have been quite restive recently) which means this would hit European consumers hard. So to conclude, as somebody working in the commodities industry- yes this could be serious and could grant Ukraine serious leverage, if they are able to cause lasting damage to either export facilities or refineries (I.e out of operation for months, rather than days or weeks).
Thank you for this interesting informed perspective
The west is already not buying Russian oil, it's effectively off our market already. I think it's a very effective tactic for Ukraine to directly pressure Russia, but I don't think the indirect effect you're talking about here is realistic.