Russia's War Against Ukraine

[MengJiao]

Strictly speaking, Ukraine won't win the war until they annoy the Russians out of continuing to fight. Taking back the Donbass and Crimea (and anything related between them) won't necessarily end the war.

True, but annihilating the Russian army makes for a good bargaining chip.

PS: for that matter, if Ukraine and Belarus join NATO, who is Russia going to use its power against?  Is there a hapless central Asian place they can bomb
into the Stone Age?    Surely no one would seriously miss Afghanistan, even the Taliban wants to go somewhere else.

[Sir Slash]

The figure of 500,000 casualties total did not include Ukrainian civilian casualties I believe. Two Hundred Thousand military losses PLUS however many civilian losses add up to...who knows?

Ukraine is mostly undeveloped but NOT jungle-covered which makes hiding a lot easier doesn't it? Look at the maps and you'll see villages and towns all over the whole region, not at all like Vietnam. And it's almost all open territory as far as the drone can see. Where would insurgents hide? Where can armies hide? You get more than 5 guys run into a house and arty follows immediately behind. That's precisely  why Ukraine cannot throw large numbers of it's soldiers into this war because they simply wouldn't survive the lethality of modern weapons. Any group larger than platoon-strength is seen and almost immediately destroyed. Same for the Russkies. Somebody real smart is going to get this figured-out but before then, no military formations large enough to be decisive in combat can survive to become decisive.

On the whole Prigo thing, we are back to the Russian dolls inside each other until you get to the last doll, who can figure it all out? I recall Churchill's line that Russia is a mystery, inside a puzzle, surrounded by an enigma or some such. Still is.

[FarAway Sooner]

I'd suggest that concentrated formations in the field are only vulnerable so long as each side retains enough artillery and enough spotting resources to target troop concentrations.  While this doesn't guarantee a victory by either side in a war of attrition, it does suggest that breakthroughs are possible.

The collapse of the German Army in 1918 might be one model to aspire to.  Of course, it was a near-run thing, and I don't know that the French or the British (or even the Americans, who got off almost scot free by comparison) were delighted to pay the price required to win that war.

The humanitarian cost in Ukraine has been catastrophic.  But I'm not sure that concluding the war on its current terms will do anything to prevent that same calamity from happening again, once Putin and his kleptocrat buddies catch their breath.

[GDS_Starfury]

now for more fun videos of russians getting their asses kicked.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1694753107924734307

[ArizonaTank]

The problem with using 'statistical' measures to predict outcomes in war is that the numbers don't count the soft factors. Sometimes these factors are just as important, or maybe even more important.

Sometimes its as simple as one side just wanting to win harder than the other side.

History has examples in warfare where the numbers just didn't synch with the end result; Germany's "strange victory" against France in May '40, The American Revolution, The Franco-Prussian War, The Russo-Japanese War, The Japanese Singapore Campaign, Napoleon's War against the 2nd Coalition. and the Soviets War in Afghanistan.

Even in the American Civil War. The North who was fighting with 'one hand tied behind its back', could have conceivably lost by negotiating peace with the CSA if the election of 1864 had turned out differently.

Sure on paper Russia can pull a bunch of AK-47s out of storage and flood the fields in Ukraine with a million conscripts. And maybe they have another few thousand old cold-war tanks in mothballs somewhere (I don't think so, but for arguments sake).

But I just don't see Russia rallying around Putin enough to go "all-in" on crushing Ukraine. 

Still, Putin has occasionally surprised me, and I could be completely wrong. 

[Windigo]

Their proficient use of drones during this assault is chilling, ruthless and effective.

[ArizonaTank]

Ukrainian pilots to be trained on F-16s in October in Tucson, Arizona.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tucson-base-to-be-used-to-train-ukrainian-fighter-pilots/ar-AA1fJHg0?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=6ca5eeaddb2e437ca94d2fa043293213&ei=22

I think I read there will also be training in Germany somewhere as well.

[Gusington]

I can see Russia fully mobilizing and arming virtually every able bodied person numbering into the 10s of millions to crush Ukraine if they have to. Russia is that far gone.

Ukraine has a history of effective partisan fighting dating to WWII and decades before. And I can see them also mobilizing their entire society to survive.

The real question is what a victory looks like to Ukraine and what a victory looks like to Russia. Obviously Ukraine must survive but at what cost? And what will convince Russia to stop?

[MengJiao]

I can see Russia fully mobilizing and arming virtually every able bodied person numbering into the 10s of millions to crush Ukraine if they have to. Russia is that far gone.

  What was stopping them from doing that to start with?  If there was really any real point to overrunning Ukraine, why didn't they do this massive mobilization to start with?  The real problem for the Russians is that there is no actual reason to overrun Ukraine.  Let's just say we have seen World War Three, it was pointless, crappy a horrible mess and the Russians lost.  Now they have to start World War IV and they might as well just blast some other pointless target.  I vote for Afghanistan or Mali or Niger or Syria.  Assuming the Chinese let the Russians run loose a while longer and I doubt the Chinese can afford any more shenanigans.

[GDS_Starfury]

I can see Russia fully mobilizing and arming virtually every able bodied person numbering into the 10s of millions to crush Ukraine if they have to. Russia is that far gone.

they literally can't.  this has been discussed ad nauseam.

[Gusington]

Today they can't. Who knows what will happen in a year.

They didn't fully mobilize from the beginning because they hoped the war would be over in two weeks.

[Groggy]

"So the Russian officer (Girkin) who started the Donbas war in 2014 is in jail, the only Russian general to carry out a successful maneuver in 2022 (Surovikin) has been relieved of duty, and the only Russian commander to take a city in 2023 (Prigozhin) has been murdered."

https://twitter.com/TimothyDSnyder/status/1694468840296481272?s=20

[FarAway Sooner]

Yeah.  Predicting anything that's going to happen next in a war with certainty is setting yourself up for a fall. 

Predicting anything that's going to happen next involving Russia with certainty is setting yourself up for a fall.

Predicting anything that's going to happen next in a war involving Russia with certainty...

[Uberhaus]

Yeah.  Predicting anything that's going to happen next in a war with certainty is setting yourself up for a fall. 

Predicting anything that's going to happen next involving Russia with certainty is setting yourself up for a fall.

Predicting anything that's going to happen next in a war involving Russia with certainty...

Tetlocks' Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction is very interesting.  4% accuracy is typical, anything above 25%, Tetlock considers good.  For 100% accuracy, you'll want a seer.

[GDS_Starfury]

no context for it but lol

https://twitter.com/i/status/1694788814391410986