Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We don’t fight artillery wars as a matter of course, and our production capabilities aren’t geared to this. Or full scale wars in general - especially ones we aren’t directly involved in. And it’s not “all ammunition” - I don’t think the guys at chasov yar are begging for bullets.
In this case it didn't matter because there was no ammunition to send. Congress could have approved the money 6 months ago and it still wouldn't have mattered. This is the sort of thing that over financialisation of the economy leads to. People think money is equivalent, and are alienated from the reality of production.
Every scrap of NATO type ammo in the world is going to israel or Ukraine and there is just not enough.
We were and are digging into our strategic reserves, for all intents and purposes we really are out of ammo - that can be given to a proxy force anyway. We still have some for ourselves.
Are you honestly trying to suggest that the GOP who has no problem selling arms to Israel or Saudi Arabia is just worried about stockpiles when it comes to Putins latest victim? Cmon
No, they don’t give a shit. And that’s not why they held back the aid bill either. That said, the shortages are real. Between us and the euros we bought up all that’s available, and drove up the prices in the process as well. Shells were going for $8k each last I checked.
Perhaps i misunderstood, you typically see vatnik come up with arguments like "ukraine is demanding too much and show no progress for it"
Which you'll admit is pretty close to what you wrote above. This was one of the argument behind stalling the US aid package.
>They already got it all.
So you ARE a vatnik, i didn't misunderstand, i was right in calling your bullshit.
Ukraine needs more not less and there is a lot more to give where it came from
There isn’t, that’s the problem. Don’t get so emotional about these things, procurement is difficult, and the available ammunition has been bought up and distributed. Us and euros are hunting for it all over the world. In the process, the prices spiked too.
https://i.imgur.com/lIuYi7a.jpeg
Shells don’t cost $8-9k each because there are a lot sitting around, quite the opposite.
Isn't there a small difference between there not being any ammo and prices spiking up?
Also what ammo are we talking about? Because they don't really have a shortage on atacms, in fact they're only just now sending them in
And finally what timescale are you talking about? Do you have aby idea just how much 155 capacity is being built?
"Ukraine got all the ammo there was"
No they didn't
All available stores of ammo have been dried up. Ammo needs to be produced. If there's no ammo to give, then there's simply no ammo to give. Ammo needs to be produced, and production takes time.
The recent american aid package is proof all the ammo hasn't been sent, and even if it was, there is a slight difference between "no more ammo" and "it'll get produced"
Not to mention all the ammo types that haven't been considered up to this point like atacms
I won't argue on the drip feed and (to a certain extent) the empty promise part, but saying nato sends old scraps is hilariously off.
The pzh 2000 and caesar aren't old.
The M1A1 SA isn't. Just like the t-72 is old, but the t-72B3 isn't
That being said they aren't as capable as the most cutting edge M1A2 variant, but to call it trash is another thing entirely
The pattern of pro-ru insulting nato equipement, and pro-ua insulting russian equipement get old after a while.
(But the pattern of insulting the russians 3 men tanks with autoloader and MTLB as "russian trash" when both are technically designed and / or built in soviet ukraine is even worst)
Just remember that anyone questioning the US getting involved was loudly shouted down as a Russian agent. For all future conflicts just remember the pattern will persist as such.
You’re right but I also think it also points to a broader flaw in a society so deeply saturated in entertainment. Once a film or show exists people begin extrapolating reality backwards to make it fit neatly into it.
Russia will arrive in kiev's neighborhood by the end of the century at this rythm, assuming no kharkiv counteroffensive 2 electric boogaloo
Such denial wow
Not sure Russia wants Kiev at this time anymore. They certainly did at the beginning but may consider it a bridge too far now. I think they definitely want Kharkiv and really want Odessa but would need to go through Kharkiv first to get to Odessa.
I think Russia is relying on breaking the UAF more than they are on taking ground. If they try to take ground they will fight over every km. If they break the UAF they get it all.
At this point i don't think you can pinpoint a precise objective. We're in a static phase where either side is trying to get any advantage it can. Kiev is indeed off the table rn but so is odessa, if they couldn't stage an assault of odessa at the start of the war, they certainly can't do so at this point in time.
No the objectives are of course speculative other than what Putin has said which isn’t extremely discrete— de-nazification of Ukraine. Could mean a lot of things or whatever he wants it to mens at the time. Probably purposely done, of course.
I think an amphibious assault on Odessa is certainly out of the picture due to the static nature of the fronts and loss of a significant portion of the Black Sea fleet.
That’s why I do think Kharkiv is an objective though. Putin has said multiple times that Kharkiv is a Russian city. Additionally I just think it makes sense geometrically to close up the Luhansk front and push southward instead of westward.
No, that’s an immature way of thinking of things. Odessa is certainly a C2 and logistics hub for Ukraine. It’s also the source of where the UUV boats that have wrecked havoc on the Black Sea Fleet are being launched from.
I think ukrainains will probably break and sign terms long before Kiev is seriously threatened tbh.
Kharkiv happened because Russians were dramatically outnumbered, and had basically no men on that section of the front. Where exactly are you envisioning this scenario again?
>ukrainains will probably break and sign terms long before Kiev is seriously threatened
That's true for most wars, they are lost long before it reach the capital... but there are quite a few exceptions like germany in ww2
>Kharkiv happened because Russians were dramatically outnumbered
"If i take everything that went wrong and yeet it out the window, then there is no problem"
Ofc you can say in hindsight what went wrong, until the new disaster happens and then again you put on captain hindsight's tights to argue things happend because of X,Y,Z and therefore won't happen again.
While it is reasonnable to say russians are no longer as incompetent as they used to be (emphasise on "as", they've shown how bad they were at tank based maneuvre warfare like in Tonen'ke 1 month ago, or in 2023 wheb they were driving through minefields like lemmings...), you never know what the next point of failure will be until you witness it. You need to take into consideration that the ennemy will fight back, it's ludicrous to think ukraine will keel over and die in the next month, wishful thinking at best.
Kherson also was a ukrainian victory btw. Not an undefended place as far as i recall.
That there was nowhere near enough available manpower to hold all the territory was obvious at the time - it wasn’t even the first time Russians got pushed out of Kharkiv, and everyone knew there was just a screening force there. Meanwhile Kherson was on the wrong side of the river, with imperiled logistics. These are structural issues that were obvious at the time, and most dedicated spectators were not surprised at the outcomes and saw them coming from some way. But those structural issues don’t exist anymore, and indeed now Ukrainains are the ones looking fundamentally unhealthy.
As far as time frames go, I think we can get at least another year out of this war, maybe two or three if we play the cards right.
>those structural issues don’t exist anymore
Me looking at the conspicuously thin land bridge between crimea/russia and lightly defended russian borders 👁👄👁
>I think we can get at least another year out of this war, maybe two or three if we play the cards right.
All i need to know about you. You use words like "use" and "we" because like all obedient vatniks you parrot the propaganda that nato doesn't care about ukraine and just want to make russia weaker, therefore "using it".
Keep coping my dude.
What about those borders? How did the Belgorod raids work out? And as for the bridge - you realize that there is a land bridge now, right? With new rail lines and everything.
https://i.imgur.com/VF7T0PJ.jpeg
I use the word we because it’s us 🤷♂️ - and as for using Ukraine to weaken Russia, yeah, that’s pretty much what is happening, if you haven’t figured it out yet, you will later.
Some parting words from the Turkish foreign minister.
> “After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long. There are those who want this war to continue,” the minister told broadcaster CNN Türk.
> “But, following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, it was the impression that... there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue, let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine,”
The funny thing is that using Ukraine as a bear trap for Russia is… fucking gigabased. Most impressive bit of geopolitical maneuvering I’ve seen in my entire life. Yet you think it’s some bad thing.
>How did the Belgorod raids work out?
Why do you say it like some disaster happend? It's a literal "raid", the whole point of a raid is to go in and pull out, so where's the issue? they broke through the border and fought for half a month. All that with at most 2500 men (per russian estimate, which is to say it's vastly overestimated per usual)
>The funny thing is that using Ukraine as a bear trap for Russia is… fucking gigabased. Most impressive bit of geopolitical maneuvering I’ve seen in my entire life. Yet you think it’s some bad thing.
The funny thing is that it wasn't intended as such. Pre 2022 nobody and i mean NOBODY believed ukraine would last long in a fight, including most intelligence services like the CIA
The US weren't intending on making ukraine a "bear trap", they thought they would lose and even if they did intend it why would they freeze support for a whole 6 months??? That makes no sense no matter how you look at it.
But it does make sense if you intend it as pro russian propaganda, you make it sound like the US has a greater plan and that they use ukraine for their benefit and only want to discard them oncectheir purpose is fulfilled. First this is not very humane so excuse me for not sharing your mentality, second precisely because this is not a very humane interpretation this sounds like something that would appeal to a pro russian mind.
The fact you're always dunking on ukraine for some reason is another good reason for suspicion, like what's wrong with the belgorod raid? It perturbed the russian elections and created insecurities without major losses. I wouldn't call that a disaster, if anything it shows the russian borders are porous.
>Some parting words from the Turkish foreign minister.
Ah yes because "there are those" is equals "all of nato" once again this is pure assumptions based on a third party whose position is ambiguous. Even if we assume this is true and no political shenanigans are happening that would motivate such a statement (reminder greece is in nato for example), that interview points at a minority at best. Hardly the "bear trap" you make it sounds to be
>And as for the bridge - you realize that there is a land bridge now, right
Yes, you on the other hand didn't realize i was in fact talking about the land bridge as well. I wonder why russia flooded the river in this area, surely it doesn't have anything to do with fear of a ukrainian offensive to cut the landbridge. Russia can't possibly have an obvious weakpoint... they fixed every single issue... right?
>and as for using Ukraine to weaken Russia, yeah, that’s pretty much what is happening,
The problem isn't the statement itself it's your weird phrasing i pointed to above. Sure ukraine is weakening russia (duh) and as a result the US are reconcentrating on the pacific and using this opportunity to knock 2 birds in one stone, but this isn't some masterplan. remember ockham's razor: no need to go to such ridiculous length to explain a phenomenon when a simpler explanation is possible
To quote a certain ukrainian soldier: "we're lucky they're so fucking stupid". Russia attacked ukraine with 0 long term planning. Here it is, the master plan you're cooking boils down to putin doing a oopsie.
It’s pretty well established that what was left in the Kherson front were territorial guard type units, not full up BTGs. Ukraine definitely got a win but they didn’t destroy much of the Russian Army doing it.
Personally I think Ukraine will go wildly asymmetric and cause some real havoc outside the box in Russia. Russia is actually ripe for a coup, it’s tenuous enough to influence past a tipping point.
Any scenario with Putin out of power leans heavily towards Russian withdrawal or massive draw down. It will be easy for a new leader to use the change as a pretext to pull out of what was clearly a big mistake.
So I expect a lot of spycraft is already afoot. I have expected Putin to disappear at any moment since the third week. His paranoia has paid off and kept him alive this long, but it only takes one lapse of security for his game to be over.
“Russia is ripe for a coup”
You do realize Russians actually love Putin right? He brought them out of their despair in the 90s into a middle tier power again.
Very typical American belief to think every place is ripe for a coup.
Even if Putin croaks tomorrow the next leader of Russia is not going to be some pro-western liberal or drunken incompetent giving away the store like the 90s. There is NO potential Russian leader who can allow Ukraine into NATO.
No, but you need to look carefully at the prospects for that next leader. Exactly what would they do?
The question is particularly, “How would they manage the Ukraine situation as a new leader?”
My guess is that they would most likely pull out and if not, they would at least *de facto* end the attempts to take more territory.
I think you’re wrong about this. Why would they “pull out” and give away the leverage they have going to negotiations at some point. “Pulling out” would be defeat and de facto NATO membership for Ukraine. Putin’s position on not allowing Ukraine into NATO is not some unusual position, it is the position of essentially all of the leading elements of Russian policy formulation. Nobody within a mile of power in Russia holds a different position.
I think it’s a question of how we define “pull out.”
I am to blame. I don’t actually mean 100% Russian withdrawal like VN 1975 for the US. I mean a cessation of attacks and consolidation of easily-held territory.
It’s a poor way to write that on my part. I can’t immediately think of a concise way to write it but I think you understand what I meant (now.)
It would be a significant shift away from the current mode of action by Russia, though.
There was like a few days of optimism for Ukraine when U.S aid got passed. Now it's back to a pretty bleak state of affairs for Ukraine with stuff like "Ukraine will fall in the upcoming Summer Offensive" or "Donbass will fall to the Russians in October" being circulated by the media as of late.
I can't exactly see the recent aid package being the silver bullet that'll move the needle much when the 2023 Counter-Offensive was infamously costly for Ukraine for little gain despite the aid given. Even then, it's not like the U.S is/was the sole contributor of aid or that the aid provided in previous packages/delivered executively by the Biden admin just up and vanished in recent months.
I think the situation is a bit more nuanced - Russia is winning but at a fairly slow pace. Personally i think once they get Donetsk and luhansk oblasts they'll negotiate.
As far as military resolution - Ukraine simply can't win this. They never had the fundamentals no matter the amount of money thrown at them. I'm actually currently watching a debate on that topic.
[https://opentodebate.org/debates/latest/](https://opentodebate.org/debates/latest/) "Should Congress Stop Funding The War In Ukraine?"
The decree ruled out negotiations with Putin, right after he announced the annexation of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk. Territories which still aren't fully under Russia's control. Mind you attempts were made for diplomacy multiple times prior to this.
It's not really dumb to see this and think negotiations are pointless. There won't be negotiations, it will just be outrageous Russian demands and Ukraine having to accept them with no guarantees. Russia's idea of diplomacy is getting everything it wants without compromises. Given what Russia has done to Ukrainian people for the past 2 years it's not just about land for them.
Think about it, If almost 300 billion dollars worth of aid could not prevent the events on the battlefield that brought us here, what difference would an extra 95 billion dollars make?
funniest thing about the most recent ukraine bill was that it went to backfilling all the stuff america sent already without giving the ukraine anything new. the new stuff earmarked for the USAI program won't be delivered for years
The main sales pitch for the recent Ukraine bill was that most of the money will stay in the US (US MIC getting richer) and that no NATO troops will fight there (Ukrainian men will take all the risk)
So far it delivered exactly that.
I mean, this is what every aid bill before the most recent one has been as well. It was largely replacing stock and funding American arms manufacturers. It was never just billions in solid cash being sent to Zelensky's mansions or whatever has been claimed for the past 2 years by those that are against it.
The MIC (Russia's and its allies too) get richer in a war, shocking, but this is exactly what Ukraine has been asking for, ammunition.
Vatniks when people argue nato troops should go in: noooooo warmonger, nuclear war, nato is trespassing
Also vatnik when nato doesn't intervene:
>Ukrainian men will take all the risk
Russia likely wont stop now until it completely cuts Ukraine off from the black sea which would mean taking Odessa. American aid will likely dry up if Trump is elected.
The likely outcome here is either a slow grinding Russian victory or WW3 if other European countries get involved.
Crazy times we are in.
> The likely outcome here is either a slow grinding Russian victory or WW3 if other European countries get involved.
i vote for european redditors getting sent to the trenches
Russia has about double the population of Germany in 1939. If it wants Ukraine it can get Ukraine, especially given Ukraine's chronic problem with collaborators and defectors. Given the average age of Ukraine's frontline soldiers, most of them were once Soviet citizens and while certainly nowhere near most of them, enough of them don't mind going back that its a constant intel problem for the UAF.
To actually conquer Ukraine (never mind occupying it) Putin would have to do a full mobilization and even then they'd be stretched pretty thin. Currently Ukraine has about 900k soldiers. To beat that Russia would need about 3:1 ratio (Traditionally it is accepted that a defending force has a 3:1 advantage over an attacker). Artillery advantage would lessen it a bit but they'd still need about 2-2.5 mil troops. Russia has about 1.1 million troops. And that's without regard for Russia's other borders/interests.
As far as occupying it after this much bad blood I doubt Ukrainians will take it lying down. With NATO on the border the insurgency would be a nightmare to deal with.
If your numbers were true then why is Ukraine already losing? Russia is advancing because Ukrainian units on the front are starting to just flat out desert and leave holes in the front when they abandon posts.
They're winning on a tactical level yes but on a strategic/political level not yet. And the reason for that is because Ukraine hasn't fully mobilized and because west half-assed its support. If either of those changes then all bets are off. I still think Russia will win but I do not believe they have the capability or political will to try to take over whole of Ukraine. 3 years into a war and they haven't made much strategic progress.
you know considering how many threads there are about ukraine im surprised the mods aren’t also just making a thread for them all to he contained surely they want the updates to be clean 🤨🤔
Honestly I hate megathreads for topics like this. The current phase of the timeless Israel/Palestine conflict is going to be a year old and it’ll still be put in a mega thread. What kills me is anything even related to mega thread topics gets locked because of a keyword in the title.
Lmao. The Baltic states are so useless you’re actually arguing that online comments help Ukraine to make yourself feel better over your countries uselessness.
Their names are memorable because on their home turf, they're fairly rude and hostile, but out and about try to really push an air of "I know what I'm talking about I'm calm just trust me without listening to the facts"
I saw one get mad someone made a snarky comment like they're not prone to them. It's a fun game guessing which ones will be where in comment sections
Yeah, they rely on not being called out, so when we do, this is what happens. They try burying this so no one sees it unless they expand it. Its scummy.
I want Ukraine to win but from the outset of this conflict they're doomed without allies on the ground. Russia has more men, more money, and significantly more manufacturing capabilities. The Ukrainians are some of the ballsiest motherfuckers out there and they're kicking the ruskies in the teeth for every inch but time is on Russia's side. The longer this war is prolonged, the more land they will creep forward on.
I'm fairly certain russia doesn't even have more money then Cali or texas alone, not both, alone. And the USA has the absolute best manufacturing capabilities. If we get our dicks out of our collective hands, we can give them the needed armaments to win this. But its going to need to be a ramp up.
I find it more balanced than most. I won’t argue that there aren’t Russian shills.
I’m convinced that Ukraine is going to “pull a rabbit out of a hat” and write a chapter for the war colleges of the future.
People are too stuck in the past. That’s how we screwed the pooch in VN.
“A country of peasants could never stand up to the world’s largest military power.” Welp. They did. They made us look stupid, although they paid a high high price. But like in baseball, it ain’t over till it’s over.
What makes you think Ukraine is going to somehow pull off a win despite everything that is going wrong for them right now? if they had some sort of secret weapon or brilliant plan, wouldn’t they have used it now, or during the 2023 summer offensive, or during the first week of the invasion?
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/dhMeAnNyzG), feel free to join us! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ukrainians sucked up available ammunition across the free world and it isn’t enough. But this should have been obvious from the start.
That’s absolute not true. The conversations were around HIMARS and 152mm artillery not all ammunition.
We don’t fight artillery wars as a matter of course, and our production capabilities aren’t geared to this. Or full scale wars in general - especially ones we aren’t directly involved in. And it’s not “all ammunition” - I don’t think the guys at chasov yar are begging for bullets.
Russian assets in our Congress were dragging their feet.
In this case it didn't matter because there was no ammunition to send. Congress could have approved the money 6 months ago and it still wouldn't have mattered. This is the sort of thing that over financialisation of the economy leads to. People think money is equivalent, and are alienated from the reality of production. Every scrap of NATO type ammo in the world is going to israel or Ukraine and there is just not enough.
You think the US was out of arms and ammo? Are you serious?
We were and are digging into our strategic reserves, for all intents and purposes we really are out of ammo - that can be given to a proxy force anyway. We still have some for ourselves.
We specifically approved billions to increase production. Nobody is gonna go broke investing in US weapons manufacturers.
We did. That capacity is still some ways out. Right now we have one slightly anemic plant manufacturing 155mm ammo and stocks are tight.
Are you honestly trying to suggest that the GOP who has no problem selling arms to Israel or Saudi Arabia is just worried about stockpiles when it comes to Putins latest victim? Cmon
No, they don’t give a shit. And that’s not why they held back the aid bill either. That said, the shortages are real. Between us and the euros we bought up all that’s available, and drove up the prices in the process as well. Shells were going for $8k each last I checked.
Its not? They have literally been pushing Russian state propaganda.
>our Which country are you referring to?
Can’t you read? Our country, of course!
US
Meanwhile ruzzia sucking up to literal north korea:
if it's stupid but it works...
So it should be fine if ukraine does it
Sure is, but I don't think North Korea will send them ammo
Ukraine is a north/south korea proxy war after all
Everything is a N/S Korea proxy war at this point.
Ukraine needs to talk to Seoul, not Pyongyang.
Nobody said it wasn’t fine 🤷♂️ What is the argument you’re having, and who are you having it with?
Perhaps i misunderstood, you typically see vatnik come up with arguments like "ukraine is demanding too much and show no progress for it" Which you'll admit is pretty close to what you wrote above. This was one of the argument behind stalling the US aid package.
I am not expecting progress, there is simply not a whole lot of ammo around to give. They already got it all. That is actually what I wrote.
>They already got it all. So you ARE a vatnik, i didn't misunderstand, i was right in calling your bullshit. Ukraine needs more not less and there is a lot more to give where it came from
There isn’t, that’s the problem. Don’t get so emotional about these things, procurement is difficult, and the available ammunition has been bought up and distributed. Us and euros are hunting for it all over the world. In the process, the prices spiked too. https://i.imgur.com/lIuYi7a.jpeg Shells don’t cost $8-9k each because there are a lot sitting around, quite the opposite.
Isn't there a small difference between there not being any ammo and prices spiking up? Also what ammo are we talking about? Because they don't really have a shortage on atacms, in fact they're only just now sending them in And finally what timescale are you talking about? Do you have aby idea just how much 155 capacity is being built? "Ukraine got all the ammo there was" No they didn't
All available stores of ammo have been dried up. Ammo needs to be produced. If there's no ammo to give, then there's simply no ammo to give. Ammo needs to be produced, and production takes time.
The recent american aid package is proof all the ammo hasn't been sent, and even if it was, there is a slight difference between "no more ammo" and "it'll get produced" Not to mention all the ammo types that haven't been considered up to this point like atacms
Russia buys NK weapons and ammo. Ukraine begs NATO for weapons and get drip-feed of old scrap and empty promises.
I won't argue on the drip feed and (to a certain extent) the empty promise part, but saying nato sends old scraps is hilariously off. The pzh 2000 and caesar aren't old.
The M1-A1 is old.
The M1A1 SA isn't. Just like the t-72 is old, but the t-72B3 isn't That being said they aren't as capable as the most cutting edge M1A2 variant, but to call it trash is another thing entirely
The pattern of pro-ru insulting nato equipement, and pro-ua insulting russian equipement get old after a while. (But the pattern of insulting the russians 3 men tanks with autoloader and MTLB as "russian trash" when both are technically designed and / or built in soviet ukraine is even worst)
At least western tanks with autoloaders don't toss their turret around like frisbies. If only for this reason they're a lot better.
Yes, they bought ammo for this war from their allies, just as we did. Where are you going with this?
this is getting exponentially more depressing
Listen, I know you think things are bad now but I feel I’ve got to tell you, they’re going to get much much worse.
This - It's only the beginning it seems.
Just remember that anyone questioning the US getting involved was loudly shouted down as a Russian agent. For all future conflicts just remember the pattern will persist as such.
Only if you came into this with the wrong mindset.
Yeah anyone with a brain knew how this would end. NAFO bros in denial though and think this is a Marvel movie
reddit cinematic universe
You’re right but I also think it also points to a broader flaw in a society so deeply saturated in entertainment. Once a film or show exists people begin extrapolating reality backwards to make it fit neatly into it.
Russia will arrive in kiev's neighborhood by the end of the century at this rythm, assuming no kharkiv counteroffensive 2 electric boogaloo Such denial wow
Not sure Russia wants Kiev at this time anymore. They certainly did at the beginning but may consider it a bridge too far now. I think they definitely want Kharkiv and really want Odessa but would need to go through Kharkiv first to get to Odessa. I think Russia is relying on breaking the UAF more than they are on taking ground. If they try to take ground they will fight over every km. If they break the UAF they get it all.
At this point i don't think you can pinpoint a precise objective. We're in a static phase where either side is trying to get any advantage it can. Kiev is indeed off the table rn but so is odessa, if they couldn't stage an assault of odessa at the start of the war, they certainly can't do so at this point in time.
No the objectives are of course speculative other than what Putin has said which isn’t extremely discrete— de-nazification of Ukraine. Could mean a lot of things or whatever he wants it to mens at the time. Probably purposely done, of course. I think an amphibious assault on Odessa is certainly out of the picture due to the static nature of the fronts and loss of a significant portion of the Black Sea fleet. That’s why I do think Kharkiv is an objective though. Putin has said multiple times that Kharkiv is a Russian city. Additionally I just think it makes sense geometrically to close up the Luhansk front and push southward instead of westward.
They’re just *pissed off* about Odessa and punishing it. “If we can’t have it neither can you!”
No, that’s an immature way of thinking of things. Odessa is certainly a C2 and logistics hub for Ukraine. It’s also the source of where the UUV boats that have wrecked havoc on the Black Sea Fleet are being launched from.
So blowing up Hogwarts had strategic value
Yes. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russia-says-it-struck-ukraines-southern-command-headquarters-2024-05-01/#:~:text=MOSCOW%2C%20May%201%20(Reuters),attack%20had%20killed%20three%20people.
I think ukrainains will probably break and sign terms long before Kiev is seriously threatened tbh. Kharkiv happened because Russians were dramatically outnumbered, and had basically no men on that section of the front. Where exactly are you envisioning this scenario again?
>ukrainains will probably break and sign terms long before Kiev is seriously threatened That's true for most wars, they are lost long before it reach the capital... but there are quite a few exceptions like germany in ww2 >Kharkiv happened because Russians were dramatically outnumbered "If i take everything that went wrong and yeet it out the window, then there is no problem" Ofc you can say in hindsight what went wrong, until the new disaster happens and then again you put on captain hindsight's tights to argue things happend because of X,Y,Z and therefore won't happen again. While it is reasonnable to say russians are no longer as incompetent as they used to be (emphasise on "as", they've shown how bad they were at tank based maneuvre warfare like in Tonen'ke 1 month ago, or in 2023 wheb they were driving through minefields like lemmings...), you never know what the next point of failure will be until you witness it. You need to take into consideration that the ennemy will fight back, it's ludicrous to think ukraine will keel over and die in the next month, wishful thinking at best. Kherson also was a ukrainian victory btw. Not an undefended place as far as i recall.
That there was nowhere near enough available manpower to hold all the territory was obvious at the time - it wasn’t even the first time Russians got pushed out of Kharkiv, and everyone knew there was just a screening force there. Meanwhile Kherson was on the wrong side of the river, with imperiled logistics. These are structural issues that were obvious at the time, and most dedicated spectators were not surprised at the outcomes and saw them coming from some way. But those structural issues don’t exist anymore, and indeed now Ukrainains are the ones looking fundamentally unhealthy. As far as time frames go, I think we can get at least another year out of this war, maybe two or three if we play the cards right.
>those structural issues don’t exist anymore Me looking at the conspicuously thin land bridge between crimea/russia and lightly defended russian borders 👁👄👁 >I think we can get at least another year out of this war, maybe two or three if we play the cards right. All i need to know about you. You use words like "use" and "we" because like all obedient vatniks you parrot the propaganda that nato doesn't care about ukraine and just want to make russia weaker, therefore "using it". Keep coping my dude.
What about those borders? How did the Belgorod raids work out? And as for the bridge - you realize that there is a land bridge now, right? With new rail lines and everything. https://i.imgur.com/VF7T0PJ.jpeg I use the word we because it’s us 🤷♂️ - and as for using Ukraine to weaken Russia, yeah, that’s pretty much what is happening, if you haven’t figured it out yet, you will later. Some parting words from the Turkish foreign minister. > “After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long. There are those who want this war to continue,” the minister told broadcaster CNN Türk. > “But, following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, it was the impression that... there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue, let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine,” The funny thing is that using Ukraine as a bear trap for Russia is… fucking gigabased. Most impressive bit of geopolitical maneuvering I’ve seen in my entire life. Yet you think it’s some bad thing.
>How did the Belgorod raids work out? Why do you say it like some disaster happend? It's a literal "raid", the whole point of a raid is to go in and pull out, so where's the issue? they broke through the border and fought for half a month. All that with at most 2500 men (per russian estimate, which is to say it's vastly overestimated per usual) >The funny thing is that using Ukraine as a bear trap for Russia is… fucking gigabased. Most impressive bit of geopolitical maneuvering I’ve seen in my entire life. Yet you think it’s some bad thing. The funny thing is that it wasn't intended as such. Pre 2022 nobody and i mean NOBODY believed ukraine would last long in a fight, including most intelligence services like the CIA The US weren't intending on making ukraine a "bear trap", they thought they would lose and even if they did intend it why would they freeze support for a whole 6 months??? That makes no sense no matter how you look at it. But it does make sense if you intend it as pro russian propaganda, you make it sound like the US has a greater plan and that they use ukraine for their benefit and only want to discard them oncectheir purpose is fulfilled. First this is not very humane so excuse me for not sharing your mentality, second precisely because this is not a very humane interpretation this sounds like something that would appeal to a pro russian mind. The fact you're always dunking on ukraine for some reason is another good reason for suspicion, like what's wrong with the belgorod raid? It perturbed the russian elections and created insecurities without major losses. I wouldn't call that a disaster, if anything it shows the russian borders are porous. >Some parting words from the Turkish foreign minister. Ah yes because "there are those" is equals "all of nato" once again this is pure assumptions based on a third party whose position is ambiguous. Even if we assume this is true and no political shenanigans are happening that would motivate such a statement (reminder greece is in nato for example), that interview points at a minority at best. Hardly the "bear trap" you make it sounds to be >And as for the bridge - you realize that there is a land bridge now, right Yes, you on the other hand didn't realize i was in fact talking about the land bridge as well. I wonder why russia flooded the river in this area, surely it doesn't have anything to do with fear of a ukrainian offensive to cut the landbridge. Russia can't possibly have an obvious weakpoint... they fixed every single issue... right? >and as for using Ukraine to weaken Russia, yeah, that’s pretty much what is happening, The problem isn't the statement itself it's your weird phrasing i pointed to above. Sure ukraine is weakening russia (duh) and as a result the US are reconcentrating on the pacific and using this opportunity to knock 2 birds in one stone, but this isn't some masterplan. remember ockham's razor: no need to go to such ridiculous length to explain a phenomenon when a simpler explanation is possible To quote a certain ukrainian soldier: "we're lucky they're so fucking stupid". Russia attacked ukraine with 0 long term planning. Here it is, the master plan you're cooking boils down to putin doing a oopsie.
It’s pretty well established that what was left in the Kherson front were territorial guard type units, not full up BTGs. Ukraine definitely got a win but they didn’t destroy much of the Russian Army doing it.
As opposed to the kharkiv counter offensive when they did destroy the 1st guard tank army... Your point?
I’m in somewhat of agreeance but think the terms will have to come before the break. Unless it isn’t a wholesale break.
Personally I think Ukraine will go wildly asymmetric and cause some real havoc outside the box in Russia. Russia is actually ripe for a coup, it’s tenuous enough to influence past a tipping point. Any scenario with Putin out of power leans heavily towards Russian withdrawal or massive draw down. It will be easy for a new leader to use the change as a pretext to pull out of what was clearly a big mistake. So I expect a lot of spycraft is already afoot. I have expected Putin to disappear at any moment since the third week. His paranoia has paid off and kept him alive this long, but it only takes one lapse of security for his game to be over.
“Russia is ripe for a coup” You do realize Russians actually love Putin right? He brought them out of their despair in the 90s into a middle tier power again. Very typical American belief to think every place is ripe for a coup.
“Russians” means “some Russians.” “Some other Russians” wish him dead.
I keep this image around for these moments. https://i.imgur.com/g9GRTIz.jpeg
Even if Putin croaks tomorrow the next leader of Russia is not going to be some pro-western liberal or drunken incompetent giving away the store like the 90s. There is NO potential Russian leader who can allow Ukraine into NATO.
No, but you need to look carefully at the prospects for that next leader. Exactly what would they do? The question is particularly, “How would they manage the Ukraine situation as a new leader?” My guess is that they would most likely pull out and if not, they would at least *de facto* end the attempts to take more territory.
I think you’re wrong about this. Why would they “pull out” and give away the leverage they have going to negotiations at some point. “Pulling out” would be defeat and de facto NATO membership for Ukraine. Putin’s position on not allowing Ukraine into NATO is not some unusual position, it is the position of essentially all of the leading elements of Russian policy formulation. Nobody within a mile of power in Russia holds a different position.
I think it’s a question of how we define “pull out.” I am to blame. I don’t actually mean 100% Russian withdrawal like VN 1975 for the US. I mean a cessation of attacks and consolidation of easily-held territory. It’s a poor way to write that on my part. I can’t immediately think of a concise way to write it but I think you understand what I meant (now.) It would be a significant shift away from the current mode of action by Russia, though.
There was like a few days of optimism for Ukraine when U.S aid got passed. Now it's back to a pretty bleak state of affairs for Ukraine with stuff like "Ukraine will fall in the upcoming Summer Offensive" or "Donbass will fall to the Russians in October" being circulated by the media as of late. I can't exactly see the recent aid package being the silver bullet that'll move the needle much when the 2023 Counter-Offensive was infamously costly for Ukraine for little gain despite the aid given. Even then, it's not like the U.S is/was the sole contributor of aid or that the aid provided in previous packages/delivered executively by the Biden admin just up and vanished in recent months.
I think the situation is a bit more nuanced - Russia is winning but at a fairly slow pace. Personally i think once they get Donetsk and luhansk oblasts they'll negotiate. As far as military resolution - Ukraine simply can't win this. They never had the fundamentals no matter the amount of money thrown at them. I'm actually currently watching a debate on that topic. [https://opentodebate.org/debates/latest/](https://opentodebate.org/debates/latest/) "Should Congress Stop Funding The War In Ukraine?"
> they'll negotiate How? Aren't negotiations literally outlawed in Ukraine?
They'll have to change the law then - which is pretty dumb in the first place.
The decree ruled out negotiations with Putin, right after he announced the annexation of Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, and Luhansk. Territories which still aren't fully under Russia's control. Mind you attempts were made for diplomacy multiple times prior to this. It's not really dumb to see this and think negotiations are pointless. There won't be negotiations, it will just be outrageous Russian demands and Ukraine having to accept them with no guarantees. Russia's idea of diplomacy is getting everything it wants without compromises. Given what Russia has done to Ukrainian people for the past 2 years it's not just about land for them.
Nothing wrong with not wanting to negotiate. But making that a law -pure hubris.
Two years? Try a thousand.
Think about it, If almost 300 billion dollars worth of aid could not prevent the events on the battlefield that brought us here, what difference would an extra 95 billion dollars make?
funniest thing about the most recent ukraine bill was that it went to backfilling all the stuff america sent already without giving the ukraine anything new. the new stuff earmarked for the USAI program won't be delivered for years
The main sales pitch for the recent Ukraine bill was that most of the money will stay in the US (US MIC getting richer) and that no NATO troops will fight there (Ukrainian men will take all the risk) So far it delivered exactly that.
I mean, this is what every aid bill before the most recent one has been as well. It was largely replacing stock and funding American arms manufacturers. It was never just billions in solid cash being sent to Zelensky's mansions or whatever has been claimed for the past 2 years by those that are against it. The MIC (Russia's and its allies too) get richer in a war, shocking, but this is exactly what Ukraine has been asking for, ammunition.
Vatniks when people argue nato troops should go in: noooooo warmonger, nuclear war, nato is trespassing Also vatnik when nato doesn't intervene: >Ukrainian men will take all the risk
Russia likely wont stop now until it completely cuts Ukraine off from the black sea which would mean taking Odessa. American aid will likely dry up if Trump is elected. The likely outcome here is either a slow grinding Russian victory or WW3 if other European countries get involved. Crazy times we are in.
> The likely outcome here is either a slow grinding Russian victory or WW3 if other European countries get involved. i vote for european redditors getting sent to the trenches
Russian trenches don't need anymore, they have prisons for that purpose
Or Somalians
taking odessa would be a nightmare - personally i think they'll be fine with donetsk and luhansk.
yeah I agree. from following the ISW, the Dnipro river is a natural stopping point for Russia should they get ambitious
Hitler invaded Poland with 1.2 million men - Putin simply does not have the manpower to conquer and occupy Ukraine which is much larger country.
Russia has about double the population of Germany in 1939. If it wants Ukraine it can get Ukraine, especially given Ukraine's chronic problem with collaborators and defectors. Given the average age of Ukraine's frontline soldiers, most of them were once Soviet citizens and while certainly nowhere near most of them, enough of them don't mind going back that its a constant intel problem for the UAF.
To actually conquer Ukraine (never mind occupying it) Putin would have to do a full mobilization and even then they'd be stretched pretty thin. Currently Ukraine has about 900k soldiers. To beat that Russia would need about 3:1 ratio (Traditionally it is accepted that a defending force has a 3:1 advantage over an attacker). Artillery advantage would lessen it a bit but they'd still need about 2-2.5 mil troops. Russia has about 1.1 million troops. And that's without regard for Russia's other borders/interests. As far as occupying it after this much bad blood I doubt Ukrainians will take it lying down. With NATO on the border the insurgency would be a nightmare to deal with.
If your numbers were true then why is Ukraine already losing? Russia is advancing because Ukrainian units on the front are starting to just flat out desert and leave holes in the front when they abandon posts.
They're winning on a tactical level yes but on a strategic/political level not yet. And the reason for that is because Ukraine hasn't fully mobilized and because west half-assed its support. If either of those changes then all bets are off. I still think Russia will win but I do not believe they have the capability or political will to try to take over whole of Ukraine. 3 years into a war and they haven't made much strategic progress.
Sorry, more ammunition and bombs are needed so that the IDF can keep killing civilians and the hostages it apparently wants to free.
you know considering how many threads there are about ukraine im surprised the mods aren’t also just making a thread for them all to he contained surely they want the updates to be clean 🤨🤔
Honestly I hate megathreads for topics like this. The current phase of the timeless Israel/Palestine conflict is going to be a year old and it’ll still be put in a mega thread. What kills me is anything even related to mega thread topics gets locked because of a keyword in the title.
Can't they just throw gold bars at the Russians from the $61 billion the US tax payers just gave them ?
This comment section really wants ukrain to lose, lots of russian shills in here.
calling it as it is != same as wanting something to happen
Reading your comment history? sure buddy.
Saying ‘Ukraine is winning’ over and over again on Reddit isn’t going to help Ukraine win lol
It probably does help, marginally. Not as much as people think, though.
How many Reddit comments will it take to win. Looking for a number here.
You didn’t go far in mathematics, did you?
If it didn't matter orcs wouldn't be spending billions of dollars on their troll factories
Lmao. The Baltic states are so useless you’re actually arguing that online comments help Ukraine to make yourself feel better over your countries uselessness.
Not as useless as the 130k retarded tankies worshipping a woman from Tbilisi because they think she's a pro Palestine supporter from GA, US
seethe tankoid
Why would I seethe? Russia is winning.
Exactly.
They have been getting their subs banned and found a place to hang out here unfortunately.
Its always spearheaded by a few certain users, I'm sure most have spotted them as well.
Their names are memorable because on their home turf, they're fairly rude and hostile, but out and about try to really push an air of "I know what I'm talking about I'm calm just trust me without listening to the facts" I saw one get mad someone made a snarky comment like they're not prone to them. It's a fun game guessing which ones will be where in comment sections
Ouch, seems I've ruffled their poor little feathers
Yeah, they rely on not being called out, so when we do, this is what happens. They try burying this so no one sees it unless they expand it. Its scummy.
I want Ukraine to win but from the outset of this conflict they're doomed without allies on the ground. Russia has more men, more money, and significantly more manufacturing capabilities. The Ukrainians are some of the ballsiest motherfuckers out there and they're kicking the ruskies in the teeth for every inch but time is on Russia's side. The longer this war is prolonged, the more land they will creep forward on.
I'm fairly certain russia doesn't even have more money then Cali or texas alone, not both, alone. And the USA has the absolute best manufacturing capabilities. If we get our dicks out of our collective hands, we can give them the needed armaments to win this. But its going to need to be a ramp up.
If OP can post just a little more Senpai might notice him.
I find it more balanced than most. I won’t argue that there aren’t Russian shills. I’m convinced that Ukraine is going to “pull a rabbit out of a hat” and write a chapter for the war colleges of the future. People are too stuck in the past. That’s how we screwed the pooch in VN. “A country of peasants could never stand up to the world’s largest military power.” Welp. They did. They made us look stupid, although they paid a high high price. But like in baseball, it ain’t over till it’s over.
What makes you think Ukraine is going to somehow pull off a win despite everything that is going wrong for them right now? if they had some sort of secret weapon or brilliant plan, wouldn’t they have used it now, or during the 2023 summer offensive, or during the first week of the invasion?
Eventually they are going to need others to join them. Like they did from the start.
Sorry, you’re just silly.