Topic: Russian Invasion of Ukraine[In Progress] - page 154. (Read 77398 times)

Putin's Palace and bunker nearby.



A modest residence for someone who likes just usual stuff like fishing, riding horses half naked and has the true spartan tastes of the "true Eastern Culture".  BTW... I wonder if this is in the range of a Storm Shadow and if Ukraine could decide to carry a "special military operation" on this.

I don’t understand why you drag this rotten shit from Ukrainian propaganda here?

This is not a tank conflict.

The superiority in tanks could have been decisive, but it was not - thanks in large part to the large number of hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers in early NATO deliveries to Ukraine. A couple of hundred Western tanks from late NATO deliveries will not help Ukraine much either.

Russia's superiority in artillery, aviation and missiles plays a much larger role at the current stage of the operation. In the autumn of last year, a temporary superiority in numbers played well into the hands of Ukraine, due to this, it was possible to achieve success near Izyum. Now Ukraine has no significant advantage in any aspect.

Here's what they were saying 2 months ago:

Russia’s army is estimated to have lost nearly 40% of its prewar fleet of tanks after nine months of fighting in Ukraine, according to a count by the specialist thinktank the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS).
That rises to as much as 50% for some of the key tanks used in combat, forcing Russia to reach into its still sizeable cold war-era stocks. Ukraine’s tank numbers are estimated to have increased because of the number it has captured and supplies of Soviet-era tanks from its western allies.

Its headline count is that Russia’s number of tanks in its army have reduced by 38% from 2,927 to 1,800, while there have been particularly heavy losses of its workhorse T-72B3, an upgrade first delivered to its army in 2013.
Heavy losses on the battlefield have meant that Russia had lost “around 50% of its pre invasion fleet” of the tank and a related variant
 Ukraine could fight better with more NATO military support, but firstly, NATO military support for Ukraine already has unprecedented volumes, and secondly, it is not profitable for NATO to inflate the conflict too much so that it does not get out of control.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/15/russian-army-has-lost-up-to-half-of-key-battle-tanks-analysts-estimate-ukraine

At the beginning of its full-scale invasion in Feb., Russia had around 3,330 operational tanks (2,840 with the ground forces, 330 with its naval infantry, and 160 with its airborne forces), according to the Military Balance 2021 database.
The database includes all tank types currently employed by Russia’s military, notably T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s, and their modifications.
According to Oryx, an online investigative project documenting equipment losses in Russia’s war, Russia has lost at least 994 tanks as of Sept. 1.

The estimated total Russian loss of 1,300 machines in Ukraine roughly corresponds to 14 full-fledged armored brigades or 42 battalion tactical groups (BTGs). This amounts to more tank fleets than the U.K., France, Germany, and Italy combined.

https://kyivindependent.com/how-many-tanks-does-russia-really-have/

Saying that Russia has used 15% of its potential is an understatement, unless you count all the scrap tanks from the 50s and 60s, like Russian propagandists do, but most of these tanks will never be restored. Russia is a strange country where on paper there's 10k tanks in reserves, but in reality half of these have been in storage for over 50 years. They don't run, cannot be restored, and even if they are somehow restored, are useless on the modern battlefield.


The reality is, Russia has used maybe 20% of its total tank reserves (on paper), but more than 50% of working, fairly modern tanks. I say fairly modern because t72 has been in use since the 70s and Russians just can't let it go. They're just adding more electronics and reactive armor and calling it a modern tank because it's cheaper than making a new one. So, it's possible a grandfather was using a T72 in the Soviet Union, and now his grandson is using it in Ukraine

It's really easy to prove that they're running out of tanks, since they've started to deploy T-62s. These are tanks that were used by Russia in Afghanistan and were already outdated in the 80s.
https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukrainian-military-captured-first-russian-t-62-tank/



These Russians have a sense of humor. Look at the name of the tank "fury" written on the barrel. Also the state of the tank, as it's a version with no reactive armor.

Here's what they were saying 2 months ago:

Russia’s army is estimated to have lost nearly 40% of its prewar fleet of tanks after nine months of fighting in Ukraine, according to a count by the specialist thinktank the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS).
That rises to as much as 50% for some of the key tanks used in combat, forcing Russia to reach into its still sizeable cold war-era stocks. Ukraine’s tank numbers are estimated to have increased because of the number it has captured and supplies of Soviet-era tanks from its western allies.

Its headline count is that Russia’s number of tanks in its army have reduced by 38% from 2,927 to 1,800, while there have been particularly heavy losses of its workhorse T-72B3, an upgrade first delivered to its army in 2013.
Heavy losses on the battlefield have meant that Russia had lost “around 50% of its pre invasion fleet” of the tank and a related variant
 Ukraine could fight better with more NATO military support, but firstly, NATO military support for Ukraine already has unprecedented volumes, and secondly, it is not profitable for NATO to inflate the conflict too much so that it does not get out of control.
[url]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/15/russian-army-has-lost-up-to-half-of-key-battle-tanks-analysts-estimate-ukraine[/url]

At the beginning of its full-scale invasion in Feb., Russia had around 3,330 operational tanks (2,840 with the ground forces, 330 with its naval infantry, and 160 with its airborne forces), according to the Military Balance 2021 database.
The database includes all tank types currently employed by Russia’s military, notably T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s, and their modifications.
According to Oryx, an online investigative project documenting equipment losses in Russia’s war, Russia has lost at least 994 tanks as of Sept. 1.

The estimated total Russian loss of 1,300 machines in Ukraine roughly corresponds to 14 full-fledged armored brigades or 42 battalion tactical groups (BTGs). This amounts to more tank fleets than the U.K., France, Germany, and Italy combined.

[url]https://kyivindependent.com/how-many-tanks-does-russia-really-have/[/url]

Saying that Russia has used 15% of its potential is an understatement, unless you count all the scrap tanks from the 50s and 60s, like Russian propagandists do, but most of these tanks will never be restored. Russia is a strange country where on paper there's 10k tanks in reserves, but in reality half of these have been in storage for over 50 years. They don't run, cannot be restored, and even if they are somehow restored, are useless on the modern battlefield.


The reality is, Russia has used maybe 20% of its total tank reserves (on paper), but more than 50% of working, fairly modern tanks. I say fairly modern because t72 has been in use since the 70s and Russians just can't let it go. They're just adding more electronics and reactive armor and calling it a modern tank because it's cheaper than making a new one. So, it's possible a grandfather was using a T72 in the Soviet Union, and now his grandson is using it in Ukraine

It's really easy to prove that they're running out of tanks, since they've started to deploy T-62s. These are tanks that were used by Russia in Afghanistan and were already outdated in the 80s.
[url]https://mil.in.ua/en/news/ukrainian-military-captured-first-russian-t-62-tank/[/url]



These Russians have a sense of humor. Look at the name of the tank "fury" written on the barrel. Also the state of the tank, as it's a version with no reactive armor.

I do not agree. Ukraine is now fighting at the maximum of its military potential, for Ukraine it is a matter of life and death. Russia has used its military potential, I think by 15%, for Russia this is a military special operation.

Welcome to the light! The second step is to figure out who is benefiting more, regardless of what "winning" means for you.


Ukraine is fighting with one arm tied behind the back. They are barely hitting targets in the RF, they are not attacking your allies and NATO is not providing jets, long rage NAMSAMs and sent just a couple of Patriots for marketing purposes.  Pretty much the remaining RF advantage is numbers in arty platforms and munitions and that can be disrupted by attacking the logistics.

This unfulfilled prediction was made at an early stage of the conflict, when my immersion in it was too superficial. I am still not too immersed in it because of the geographical distance, but after 15 months of tracking, I think I began to better understand what was happening. Therefore, now I am not making any forecasts on the timing, it turned out that there are many forces (both in Russia and in the West) that benefit from further prolongation of the conflict.

However, my general message has not changed for a second - Ukraine did not have and does not have the slightest chance of winning this confrontation. Too different weight categories for rivals. Even with NATO military assistance. Even taking into account the difference in levels of motivation, when one side is waging a domestic war against an aggressor-invader, and the other side is just conducting a military special operation. For Ukraine, the best thing was to conclude a peace treaty in April last year, when there was such an opportunity - now it would be able to do a lot of work on the road to recovery. This conflict is beneficial to many, but certainly not to Ukraine itself.

So, Mr. Analyst, what went wrong?  

What led you to be so confident in your prediction that you stated it as a matter of fact and considered all who didn't come to the same conclusion naive and foolish?  

Did you underestimate the capabilities of Ukraine?
Overestimate Russias?

Are you capable of saying either of these things out loud?  

So, Mr. Analyst, what went wrong?  

What led you to be so confident in your prediction that you stated it as a matter of fact and considered all who didn't come to the same conclusion naive and foolish?  

Did you underestimate the capabilities of Ukraine?
Overestimate Russias?

Are you capable of saying either of these things out loud?  

For any semi-competant analysts out there who enjoy this stuff, the first site I've found with before/after images of several of the larger explosions lately is here:

  https://www.thedrive.com/author/tyler-rogoway

My own analysis appears to be flawed insofar as I estimated it more likely that such materials would be stored deep underground.  Anyway, it does give an indication of the kinds of cratering which might be underneath mushroom clouds of this magnitude.  I'd like to see more serious info about the 'nato bunker' event (if it actually happened at all.)

---

The buzz I'm getting leads me to think it likely that there were indeed DU munitions.  Right now it's mostly scientiffically illiterate jerk-off channels talking about the radiation increases and stuff, but that's not atypical for such events which are sensitive.

Some Russian expert did an explanation of distribution of DU in-use vs. being blown up in an ammo dump.  It was accurate enough, but not very well understood on a physics basis or on a political/propaganda basis.

In a very general sense, the radioactive risk of DU is notably different than, say, the Fukushima event or nuclear attacks or what-have-you.  DU for munitions (or protective armor) is not necessarily highly refined to get other contaminants out.  Some of these do have a notable toxicity, and some of them have a radioactive decay chain profile of their own.

In a general sense, DU is an emitter of alpha particles.  In single atom sizes it would be a non-threat.  Alpha particles do great damage, but are quickly stopped by nearby material.  The trouble is that if they form a particle and lodge in tissue, the nearby tissue will be what stops the alpha particle always and over time the cells in the immediate area it can get a pretty significant dose (and their DNA impacted.)

I don't know without further research, but in principle is there is a lot of DU particles of noticeable size in, say, a field of wheat, it might not be advisable to be plowing those fields or working in a mill where the grain is processed.

It is claimed that somewhat elevated (albeit less than a magnitude of difference) levels of bismuth are being detected radiologically (via gamma decay) in the down-wind areas of the Klwhatever explosion and all the way into Poland.  This would about what I would expect if there were at least some DU munitions which were involved with a large explosion.

You did it again.

If one unfulfilled forecast put an end to the career of every analyst, there would not be a single analyst left in the world.

Well, I will take note that your accusations of lying to me are unfounded and you cannot support them with any good arguments. I willingly share links to the source when I report this or that news on the topic. As for Ukraine's inability to organize some kind of coherent spring counter-offensive, this is not news, the lack of success speaks for itself.

You did it again.

If one unfulfilled forecast put an end to the career of every analyst, there would not be a single analyst left in the world.

No, it would be a full time job and since you do not link any source (not even "one of those sources") there is no need. You just repeat the official propaganda, so I think that whoever choose to believe it will probably not come this forum to seek information.

For example, all those TV commentators and propagandists speaking about nuking here and nuking there, without any mention about the fact that there is both a defence, a first strike capability and a second strike capability that would immediately take place (if needed, I got the feeling that US can pretty much get revenge in full without even using nuclear capabilities).  It reminds me when the Iron Curtain was lifted and all the people living under communism discovered the extent of the lies and the deceit they were suffering for decades.

Does anyone in the RF TV dare to mention that the UK and France, not to mention the US, have nuclear capabilities, including those in mobile platforms such as sub and planes? Nah... that would be too scary for the sods in the RF.

It is good that you like fireworks. There is going to be a lot of fireworks.

According to your information Russia was going to have a parade in Kyiev on May 9th, 2022.  (It would be naive and foolish to doubt it!)

ps According to my information

For Russian President Vladimir Putin, Victory Day also stands at the core of the secular religion that he has spent his 23 years in power building – the belief that Russia is both invincible and righteous.

But Victory Day celebrations this year highlight how Putin’s cult has laid the groundwork for its own defeat. There are two reasons for this: First, the Russian president cast his war on Ukraine as a continuation of the just fight honoured on Victory Day, but failed to maintain this fallacy; and second, the failure of his unjust and bloody war is allowing Ukraine and other Eastern European countries to reclaim the narrative of victory in World War II.

It cannot be underestimated just how important the cult of Victory Day has been to Putin’s propaganda and the legitimacy of his regime. Over the last 20 years, the Victory Day parade has grown in pomp and scale.

Putin has re-introduced a number of Soviet traditions, including the display of large military hardware at the main Victory Day parades; he has also embraced the so-called “immortal regiment” marches, in which citizens join mass processions with portraits of their ancestors who fought in World War II.

Since 2014, the Kremlin has blended this public memorialisation with propaganda casting Ukraine as the inheritors of the Nazi regime. Even Moscow’s Victory Museum combines the story of the Great Patriotic War – the way Word War II is known in Russia – with that of the conflict in Ukraine.

But while there are undoubtedly those in Russia who have been suckered into this narrative, the events of the past year have severely undermined it.

One just has to look at the number of Russians who fled the country over the last year. Estimates show that they are between 500,000 and one million – more than have complied with the mandatory draft that Putin had to institute last September due to the lack of volunteers to fight against “the Nazis” in Ukraine.

The clear lack of enthusiasm among the Russian population for the “special military operation” – as the Kremlin initially called it – has also forced Putin to rely on mercenaries.

The most important battle in the past six months – the one over the besieged city of Bakhmut in Ukraine’s Donetsk region – has been fought by recruits for the private military company Wagner, owned by Yevgeny Prigozhin, also known as “Putin’s cook”.

In recent days, Prigozhin made public his disputes with the defence ministry, threatening to withdraw from that fight if his forces were not provided with adequate military supplies. The public squabble was likely little more than an attempt to cover up the fact that both Prigozhin and the army leadership have no grand victory in Bakhmut or elsewhere to present to Putin for Victory Day.

Worse still, in advance of this year’s celebrations, Russia appears unable to secure its own territory. At least six Russian regions cancelled their parades, warning that they could be targets for Ukrainian attacks. Even Moscow’s immortal regiment march – in which Putin himself participated last year – has been called off.

At the start of the full-scale invasion, the Kremlin had claimed that Kyiv would be taken in three days. But 440 days later, Russia’s army and its mercenaries do not appear any closer to victory – even in Bakhmut.

Putin shows no signs of revisiting his strategy, however. He has gone too far and has hinged the legitimacy of his rule on the conflict in Ukraine. He continues to believe that he can wait out Western support for Kyiv. But this waiting game bears its own risks for Putin, as the war in Ukraine erodes his legitimacy.

Elsewhere in the post-Soviet space, a new narrative about Victory Day, one that is truly welded to its original spirit of resisting fascist aggression, is arising. On its eve, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy proposed that Ukraine join other European countries in celebrating victory over Nazism on May 8 and mark Europe Day on May 9.

A larger percentage of the Ukrainian population perished in World War II than Russia’s. Kyiv today has every right to claim the legacy of the fight against fascism in resisting Putin’s invasion, and it has a coalition of international support to rival that of the Allies in the 1940s.

Other Eastern European countries, like Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Bulgaria, have also abandoned communist-era Victory Day celebrations on May 9 and instead mark it on May 8, along with fellow EU states. They, too, are challenging the Kremlin’s attempt to resurrect Soviet-era narratives about the war and downplay their own contributions to defeating Nazism.

This is an important process that is directly challenging not just Putin’s propaganda but also his claim to legitimacy.

In the lead-up to his full-scale invasion, Putin complained that the West had turned the country into an “anti-Russia” and alleged that Ukrainian forces with Western assistance were seeking to eradicate the Russian language, culture and history.

His claims of ethnic cleansing have, of course, turned out to be a lie. The hostile reception Russian-speaking Ukrainians gave to Russian soldiers dismantled this myth. But Putin was right about one thing – that Ukraine is turning into an “anti” Russia, specifically anti-Putinist Russia.

By launching his war in Ukraine and continuing the deadly fight with little regard for Russian lives, Putin laid the groundwork for his own downfall. He is not only losing any claim to the mantle of Victory Day, but handing it to those opposed to his regime.

Future Victory Days will celebrate the defeat of both Nazi Germany and Putin’s Russia.

Could you also clarify what exactly of the information you quoted seems to be true so that I can better deal with my illusions and limiting stereotypes. Or at least reasonably refute the part that seems false to you. Without solid arguments, your statements seem unfounded to me.

For the Patriot let me quote from Guardian a statement from Strategic and International Studies about the Patriot which is as follows:

"The Patriot system was designed before hypersonic weapons were sent to battlefield and manufacturer Raytheon has not said publicly that the is effective against a missile flying at hypersonic speeds (anything above five times the speed of sound). While the US said that the Patriot system brought down last week’s Khinzal missile, it was not clear if that missile was traveling at hypersonic speed at the time.

While Russia’s Kinzhal missile may reach speeds of up to 7,600 mph (12,350 kph), “Russia’s designation of the Kinzhal as a ‘hypersonic’ missile is somewhat misleading, as nearly all ballistic missiles reach hypersonic speeds (i.e. above Mach 5) at some point during their flight,” the Center for Strategic and International Studies said in a March 2022 report"

So it is misleading as always what you are talking about,Patriot just had some damage but the reality is all Kinzhal 'hypersonic' missiles were shot down.

The link for the above statement,scroll down there to find it as there are many news together

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2023/may/17/russia-ukraine-war-live-last-ship-to-leave-ukraine-under-current-grain-deal-jets-pledge-a-good-start-says-zelenskiy?page=with:block-6464852b8f08293047a55885&filterKeyEvents=false

In fact of the matter. Ukraine planned to enter the Crimea in May, May is running out, and Ukraine is bogged down in positional battles near Bakhmut, and with each lost ammunition depot, its offensive potential is reduced. Even if Zelensky’s current trip around Europe can be considered successful (although in France he was caustically called the Circus Chapiteau), Europe is not able to supply as many weapons without damaging its arsenals as Russia destroys with missiles and drones. And the US is now in temporary difficulties due to the debt ceiling and reputational losses due to damage to the Patriot.

You said once that every Taxi driver knows how to govern the country. I seems that every troll out here is also a general. What a marvellous country!

Most of the information provided is, as usual, 10% true, rest invented.

If you listen carefully, they're asking Putin to stop been weakling and nuke UK, or
resign and let real patriot step in and do what they want

In fact of the matter. Ukraine planned to enter the Crimea in May, May is running out, and Ukraine is bogged down in positional battles near Bakhmut, and with each lost ammunition depot, its offensive potential is reduced. Even if Zelensky’s current trip around Europe can be considered successful (although in France he was caustically called the Circus Chapiteau), Europe is not able to supply as many weapons without damaging its arsenals as Russia destroys with missiles and drones. And the US is now in temporary difficulties due to the debt ceiling and reputational losses due to damage to the Patriot.