Russia's War Against Ukraine

[FarAway Sooner]

I wonder if Kadyrov is worried about pissing away his most loyal (and effective) armed followers fighting in a proxy war for Russia?  If either his men's loyalty--or his own loyalty to Putin--wavers, lots of bets are off.

Of course, having been Putin's handpicked guy, I guess his only other option would be to go to the Chinese.

[GDS_Starfury]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/09/zelensky-ukraine-victory-winning-russia-war/671464/

[GDS_Starfury]

[GDS_Starfury]

now I'm hungry.  >:(

https://twitter.com/i/status/1571639652154589184

[Crossroads]

A very interesting thread on Russian railway based logistics network towards Ukraine. Now, if only Ukraine could continue their thrust over the Oskil river and cut the railway from Valyuki hub (RU) to Luhans, the Russians would be in deep trouble there. Here's hoping.

https://twitter.com/warnerta/status/1571318703173541889

[GDS_Starfury]

[GDS_Starfury]

and mass graves.

[Pete Dero]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russias-volunteer-fighters-abandoned-as-vladimir-putin-approaches-total-failure-in-ukraine

Low morale continues to plague Russia's troops, and Ukraine claims that multiple Russian units have been "trying to negotiate with the Ukrainians on surrender and transfer under the auspices of international law."

Ukrainian intelligence further claimed on Sunday that some Russian military hospitals have refused to treat so-called "volunteers" who have been fighting on Russia's behalf, since they do not have regular armed forces classification. Other volunteer fighters were "left behind... without any support or help," as Russian forces retreated from occupied territories, according to Ukrainian intelligence.

[Crossroads]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/russias-volunteer-fighters-abandoned-as-vladimir-putin-approaches-total-failure-in-ukraine

Low morale continues to plague Russia's troops, and Ukraine claims that multiple Russian units have been "trying to negotiate with the Ukrainians on surrender and transfer under the auspices of international law."

Ukrainian intelligence further claimed on Sunday that some Russian military hospitals have refused to treat so-called "volunteers" who have been fighting on Russia's behalf, since they do not have regular armed forces classification. Other volunteer fighters were "left behind... without any support or help," as Russian forces retreated from occupied territories, according to Ukrainian intelligence.

Another recent article on low morale from the pov of grassroot soldiers. 200 days of war, no cycling of troops, day after day...

https://cepa.org/russias-military-losing-the-will-to-fight/

[JasonPratt]

Re civilian casualties and showing strength to the Russviets: yes, I'm well aware of those prior examples and justifications (as I said in my comments). I understand those -- I don't like them but I understand them. As I said, I even understand what "Blowtorch Komer" was trying to do with his infamous scorched-terror tactics. I also understand going after the power and roadway infrastructure (though it isn't always clear what effect that's having on the Ukrainian military per se. The dam strike I linked to earlier ended up hampering military action in crossing downstream for example, but that wasn't immediately obvious.)

My point, which I was calling out from that video's propaganda, was that they're now trying to publicly justify ramping up the civilian Uk casualties (beyond what they were already pretending they weren't doing), on the theory that the US only respects brutal ruthless strength and so if Russia just kills enough civilians in the contested area (Ukraine) then the US will respect Russian territorial claims in the contested area and thus come to agree that Russia should control the area. (Thus backing off supplying the Uks with systems, material, and intel.)

This would be like saying the Allied rationale for hitting Caen with kilotons of explosive ordnance during the breakout from Normandy, was to impress the Nazis with our ruthless strength in murdering civilians so that they agreed we thereby had a better right than they did to do whatever we wanted with the French population, whereupon the Nazis would honor our strength and withdraw their military from France. Or like saying Komer's rationale was that if we showed we're willing to more brutally murder civilians than the NVA, they would therefore recognize we had a better right to control those civilians and so the NVA would honor our efforts and stop supporting the Viet Cong.

That was the crazy rationale for Russians to hit civilians I was gawking at, in that propaganda piece.


Edited to add: it occurs to me that I'm getting this from the English translation of the video, which might have itself been twisted for its own propaganda against the Russians.

[JasonPratt]

I wonder if Kadyrov is worried about pissing away his most loyal (and effective) armed followers fighting in a proxy war for Russia?  If either his men's loyalty--or his own loyalty to Putin--wavers, lots of bets are off.

Of course, having been Putin's handpicked guy, I guess his only other option would be to go to the Chinese.

Well, Kadyrov was leading the recent promotional marketing (so to speak) about Russian/satellite regions each anteing up another 1000 troops for the war effort, supposedly kicking in another 1000 himself. I kind of doubt those are his most loyal elite troops, but still, he's at least trying to signal loyalty to the regime. That signal doesn't mean he is loyal, or that he isn't planning to ripcord out asap, but that was (in itself) a substantial signal. (Sometimes it seems like Russia's main claim to being the "Third Rome", is out-Byzantining the Byzantines. ;) )

[MengJiao]

A very interesting thread on Russian railway based logistics network towards Ukraine. Now, if only Ukraine could continue their thrust over the Oskil river and cut the railway from Valyuki hub (RU) to Luhans, the Russians would be in deep trouble there. Here's hoping.

  I'm reading the Washington Post's reconstruction of early events in the war:  Battle for Kyiv: Ukrainian valor, Russian blunders combined to save the capital

  Somewhat paradoxically, one of the things that might have made the successful defense of Kyiv possible was that the Ukrainians were not in any particular defensive positions.  They
really we not expecting the attack and all they had done was to move forces off of their bases where they would be obvious targets.  Kinda weird.  So they weren't at the border or at the
airports and lots of stuff was off in training or even way south.

[Pete Dero]

Now, if only Ukraine could continue their thrust over the Oskil river and cut the railway from Valyuki hub (RU) to Luhans, the Russians would be in deep trouble there. Here's hoping.

What I've learned from local news is that these gains weren't really the purpose.  Ukraine wanted a moral booster for the people and for the army by winning some battles and regaining some territory before winter.
Current gains are far larger then they ever could have imagined (because Russian resistance turned out far weaker than expected) and this leaves them with difficult decisions to make : consolidate current results or push for more with an army that wasn't prepared for that.

[SirAndrewD]

That was the crazy rationale for Russians to hit civilians I was gawking at, in that propaganda piece.


Edited to add: it occurs to me that I'm getting this from the English translation of the video, which might have itself been twisted for its own propaganda against the Russians.

You're still not invited to the spooning.

[JasonPratt]

^ Phew!

Now, if only Ukraine could continue their thrust over the Oskil river and cut the railway from Valyuki hub (RU) to Luhans, the Russians would be in deep trouble there. Here's hoping.

What I've learned from local news is that these gains weren't really the purpose.  Ukraine wanted a moral booster for the people and for the army by winning some battles and regaining some territory before winter.
Current gains are far larger then they ever could have imagined (because Russian resistance turned out far weaker than expected) and this leaves them with difficult decisions to make : consolidate current results or push for more with an army that wasn't prepared for that.

Butt-kicking while the butt-kicking is good, until one finds the resistance, is usually a sound tactic; but this gets back to my question earlier chewing over whether the Ukrainians are prepared to hold the recovered ground -- or how much they can be prepared to hold, which would be another limit to the pushing.

Or do they keep pushing beyond their ability to hold ground, in order to reduce enemy forces, and then back off to where they have enough force density to hold the ground? And how far back would that be? And how problematic does that look if/when the Russians re-retake the ceded ground? There's also the political / promotional juggle of how much of the Donbas breakaway regions to retake (if possible, while the retaking is good). Theoretically those regions broke away willingly to join the Russians -- but maybe they've got remorse now they've had a protracted taste of Orc government?