….now for the ‘second part’ of this update, and some analysis… AIR/MISSILE WAR Yup, starting with this topic, ‘again’ - because additional details about the Russian air strikes on the Odesa area from the last night (22-23 July) became known, and I think there’s a need for analysis, too.
I have not seen any significant changes in territory control on the ISW maps for months. Thus, the "not a little territory" is too small to notice at the overall scale.
What you are writing here is not facts, but your personal opinion. And you know nothing about "the West" or who is interested in what for what reason. What you are doing is spreading the Russian narrative that the evil "West" is not interested in Eastern Europe blah blah blah.
Hey Tom, I’m just going to mention that Odessa port, the one you see on pictures from the Duke down Potemkin stairs is actually a passenger port, the grain elevators are probably 50 kilometers away. The Spaso-Preobrazhenaky Sobor is in the center of the city about 2 kilometers as the crow flies from the Duke inland. The monument to Voronzov is located in the square right outside. The house with Atlante sculpture is down the street. This is what every Odessit knows as part of the old city. There is no military objects anywhere in sight.
He would get more of it Galicina or Lvov, than in Odessa. Recently saw a poll that said there are more Russian speakers, and therefore, more transgrations in Odessa than anywhere in Ukraine.
I bet entire Odesa will switch to Ukrainian languadge after this week.
It happend to Kyiv. 20 years ago noone spoke Ukrainian, and now everyone speak only Ukrainian in Kyiv.
Everyone I know from Kharkiv switched to Ukrainian. Very good quality, even guys from Carpathians asked where they learned such a pure academical Ukrainian pronounsiation and broad vocabular.
I don’t think what language one speaks is necessarily a good indication of loyalty.
I’ll give you a couple of examples:
Last year I was visiting family in Berlin, while Okean Elzy was playing there. So, we decided to go to show our support. When we got there very few people were actually speaking Ukrainian, most of them being refugees from Donbas and Kharkiv areas. P. S.: Trivia time. in 2014, Okean Elzy was playing to sold out crowd at Chornomorets Stadium in Odessa, guess what was the only song they played in Russian ever? I’ll give you a hint. It was “there’s a city, I know...”, colloquially known as anthem of Odessa.
2. A lot of war clips still have Ukrainian soldiers, from different regions, speaking to each other in Russian.
Zaluzhny, Zelensky, Arestovich, and almost the entire government all speak Russian first. That does not make any of them any less Ukrainian.
Syrskiy was raised as a russian speaking boy + education, same with Zelenskiy.
Zaluzhniy was born and raised in Novohrad-Volysnkiy, so his native/mother tongue was Ukrainian, no doubt. Surely, his studies and being in Odesa made him adjust to the situation to be accepted (as MANY Ukrainians from Ukraine who came to Adessa only to be subjected to humiliation for speaking "hill billy" language. Yep, Yurik, that shit is personal for me, you can guess %).
Not am I only korenoy odessit, (I never lived on moldavanka) so I actually pronounce words properly, but I am korenoy odessit, because my mother was raised in Odessa, my father was raised in Odessa, my grandparents from both side were raised in Odessa, their parents on both sides were raised in Odessa. Which makes you an “adessit” troll, and a “shesterka” and “petuh”.
A language that somebody uses should never be used as a weapon. There are Swiss who use German and French. There are British, as well as, Americans who know and use multiple languages and the languages I choose to communicate in are English and Russian. I know Ukrainian, I even have a copy of “Kobzar”, but it’s not my main language. I also love Pushkin and listen to many different genres of music, including “Okean Elzy” and “Bez Obmezhin”. And more importantly I don’t put people down and on top of all that the only thing I’d say to you, dear cur, is why aren’t you fighting in the war. There are a lot of Russian speakers out there who have been fighting since 2014, and a lot of them gave their all so you and I can have a dumb conversation about who’s a real Odessit and who’s a wanna be.
Well, there are a lot LGBTQ+ people in Odessa, you know, the warm climate and all that. Not sure if they associate themselves with Nazis especially from Azov regiment, but I did read an article recently about gay soldiers in Ukrainian army, have not read any articles about Gays in Russian army, officially they frown on that in Russian Army, although I did see a couple of videos of soldiers being affectionate with each other in the tranches and behind the stairs. I do know that there was a boy in bed in Russian Orthodox Church - Moscow patriarchate in Kievsky Lavry. So, does that answer your question?
I don’t need to convince Russians of anything. It’s like Michael Chriton book where he says it’s a lot easier to convince a psycho that he’s not a monkey. Just give him a mirror and a photo of a monkey and let him figure it out.
Hi, I regularly follow you, Simplicius and Military summary channel and it feels like I'm watching two completely different wars. I'd so love to follow one objective channel with just military facts without ideology, but unfortunately there probably isn't one.
Spot on. I just always thought Tom Copper was just slightly pro-Ukraine. But judging by the almost hysterical reactions of some of the debaters and himself, I can see that he is strongly pro-Ukrainian or rather very anti-Russian. I'm always shocked by the existence of social bubbles where it is virtually impossible for people with opposite views to the majority audience to discuss.
I'm balancing. This is a slightly pro-Ukrainian view. The other two sources are slightly pro-Russian. I like to balance and seek the truth. I like substantive discussion. BS spreading is just your label.
This is what exactly I do - put labels on sources which spreads fakes, and forget about them. Like this Sipmplicius for example. But it's your choice of what to consume of course.
Specifically with Simplicius, I haven't yet detected any intentional fakes so far. If you know of any specific intentional fakes, please share. I only note some incomplete reporting of events or misrepresentation with him. But unfortunately I encounter that here as well (among other things). As I wrote. I haven't found an objective source yet.
Information will never be completely objective, but some source of information might be. For example, Strana.ua is an objective source and yet it is Ukrainian media. Unfortunately, it is not focused on the military.
What you write is utter nonsense. The fair thing to do would be to hold a referendum in different parts of Ukraine under the auspices of the international community, with the possibility of giving a voice to also those inhabitants who have left because of the war. And based on the result, the land in question would go to Russia or Ukraine. This seems fair to me. The land is made up of people and they should have a say in where they want to belong. If it followed what you wrote, there would be a genocide of the people of Crimea and Danbas after the Russians left.
Oh, yeah, you got me. Strange that when I argue or disagree with something on pro Russian forums people there don't feel the need to call me a pro Urkain, Ukrofasit or whatever. They are much more tolerant. This labeling always happens from people who are blinded by Urkain ideology. But you're Ukrainian by name, so that excuses you.
Please inform yourself properly. A referendum was held in Ukraine back in 1991, and the majority of Ukrainians clearly voted for remaining in Ukraine (so also on the Crimea, where more than 55% voted pro Ukraine; the percentage was even higher in the Donbas).
...and there is only one character who can stop this war at any point in time - withdraw his slaves and declare a victory. And nothing would happen to him, just like nothing happened to him when he declared the war in Syria for 'over', and a 'general withdrawal of the Russian Group of Forces'. Three times.
Correspondingly, explaining Yury that he's writing 'utter nonsense' - when he's bringing it to the point....hm...
Yes, in 1991, people in Ukraine and Crimea believed that Ukraine would prosper and defend the interests of its citizens. Ukraine fared better than the Baltic States and Russia. And the year 2013 came. And after more than 20 years, how is Ukraine doing. Corruption itself. I was in Ukraine in 2003 and 2004. I was also in Crimea and I know how things worked there, what was the mood of the residents. The people were totally fed up with what the oligarchs had done to their country. So already in 2013, if there was an independent referendum, the results are quite different. I was on the Maidan in 2014 and I know how the people who rioted there were paid...etc. But with that comment you clearly show your "ideology".
I am fascinated by the idea of people proposing a referendum because people have the right to decide where they want to live. Changing national borders on the basis of referendums forced by armed conflict would set a precedent and create incredible chaos in the way the world works. Above all, who will determine when and in what case a referendum is held? Russia is a multi-ethnic state, will you insist that each nation can determine whether it wants to be part of Russia? Staying closer to your country, are you in favour of the Hungarian minority in the south of Slovakia having the right to decide in a referendum whether they want to annex part of Slovakia to Hungary? The same goes for the Hungarian minority in Serbia. Let's face it, Orbán would like this idea very much, as he has stood firm against the breakup of the great Hungary. Do you really think that this is the ideal and better world you want to live in and ensure peace and contentment for the majority of people in the world?
I gave the referendum as an example in the context of a response to another post. Don't see it in isolation. So in other words, 90% of the population of Crimea and Donetsk do not want to be part of Ukraine. It's just that some pro-Ukrainian people probably don't believe that, so I gave the referendum as an example.
Human disputes tend not to be resolved according to fairness, or there would not be wars. Russia, as the party with direct control over the regions in question, is the only actor in place to carry your proposal forward in the international stage. But surely you are aware that they have always categorically rejected it. The Russian aim is to secure more control over Ukraine entirely as a state, by which to accumulate more power to shape global affairs. The question of the wishes of a group of people living in a particular territory is no more relevant to them than it was to the Romans, the Castilians, or, well, the Russians at any other time in history.
Your premises are thus based in categorical errors.
No problem. I'll give you some examples. Calling Putin Pudding, if the Ukrainians lose somewhere, he's going to rate it with "unfortunately". Just a few hours after Kakhovka, you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Russians blew it. And the general tone of the comments about the Russians and ridiculing them, and when they do get something right you are often not mentioned it. Emphasizing primarily their losses and their losses. That's not to say that you never criticize Urkaina, but you are significantly less so and much more conciliatory towards her. And to give a positive example. For me, the most objectively reported news outlet is Strana.ua. And it is a Ukrainian source at that.
I do not understand. Do you think he is on the side of Ukraine or Russia? It's hard for Russia if he's Ukrainian. And for the fact that it is a Ukrainian source, it is much more objective than our Czech mainstream media.
No problem! As a Ukrainian, it was just a bit funny to see that you cite Страна UA as an objective source and I thought you were from Russia. Before the war started, it was a pro-Russian newspaper that promoted many fake stories. I remember it was ranked with the worst results of compliance with professional journalist standards. How do you assess its objectivity?
This really surprises me and is new information for me. They are often quoted from local media that I trust and I follow them on Telegram, where they come to me in OK. And if I look that they are based in Kyiv (https://strana.news/about.html), then if they were against Urkajin, they no longer work.
Psss, can I let you in on a little secret? In my infinite wisdom, and according to the stars, I declare that Ukraine is going to win. Maybe slowly, but it’s going to win. Mark my words. Thank you all, you’ve been a wonderful audiences, don’t forget to tip the waiters on your way out.
It depends on what you mean by a Ukrainian victory. For me, the victory of ordinary Ukrainians and Russians would be to end the War as soon as possible and people would stop dying.
If you do not know, you could've at least asked. That's indicating either
a) a latent lack of communication skills, or
b) that your presence here is insincere.
Considering you're jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions, ignoring my question (i.e. can't communicate) and can't understand something I wrote (like why did I come to the conclusion that it's the Russians who mined the Kakhovka Dam), conclusion is on hand that the answer is 'b'.
....and that's something I consider for trolling. And I ban trolls without any further discussions.
Would you, please, go wasting somebody else's time, somewhere else - or do I have to ban you?
My native language is not English, so I probably perceive the meaning of the word ideology differently. According to your expression and the last post elsewhere, your narrative is pro-Ukrainian - and that is ideology for me. And I read almost all of your posts and nowhere was it explained why you believe it was the Russians. They were just guesses. I had other information that showed that it could easily be Ukraine. I wanted to argument with you, but you expressly forbade it.
You didn't want me to ask. You wrote that I should play a psychoanalyst, so I fulfilled your wish. But I asked about the Kachovská Dam and I still didn't get an answer.
The Czech word for ideology is ideologie so it should not be so difficult for you to understand.
According to the Czech version of Wikipedia; "Ideology is an elaborate set of opinions, attitudes, values and ideas with an apologetic or offensive function based on the formulation of the political, economic, worldview and/or similar interests of a particular group."
This is not an objective and independent source. I read somewhere that it is covertly funded by some government agency. I can't find it now. But the truth is that they are probably the most objective.
50% of cases doesn't seem like much to me. It's one of the more objective ones. But the important thing is who's funding them. That doesn't guarantee impartiality for me.
You're right. I was verifying it now. However, I read somewhere that it is covertly funded by some government agency. I can't find it now. But the truth is that they are probably the most objective.
Perhaps it's 'covertly funded by some government agency', but primarily it's a privately-owned think-tank, foremost serving different PMCs.
I do understand that to many people this sounds incredible, and 'can't be' and whatever else, but that's the way things work in the USA almost since the country was established as an independent and sovereign state. That's called 'private and corporate interests'.
From my opimion, Tom copper is the best when it comes to tactical OSINT analisis. He speaks his opinions bends to noone and prone to sarcasm :). Some times he wonders into politics behind conflicts.
You are right. That's why I read it. However, this does not mean that he is right in everything and has a "patent of reason". That's why I also read other sources.
It doesn't do me any good to sit at a computer for hours at a time into the night, fending off hateful attacks from people like you. From people who don't want to debate but just want to spread their ideology.
Your ideology is different than Tom Cooper's. It's like the mindset of a little kid who still believes in pink ponies. But it seems to me that Ukrainians in general had the behavior of small children until 2022. For example, they believed that joining the EU would save them, yet they couldn't deal with oligarchs and giant corruption in their daily lives for 30 years. In general, I have a lot of sympathy for them. Many of them have been here for decades working on construction sites for a miserable wage. Sad. But now they have a new slapper (Russia) to blame for all their past failures.
You are living under a complete illusion of how the real world works. Crimea will never be conquered by Ukraine. And if it threatens to, there will be a nuclear holocaust. Crimea has always been Russian. Khrushchev gave it to Ukraine in 1951. But the population remained there.
Military Summary YouTube channel is terrible, I used to go there last year when I needed something to laugh at as whoever was running it was basically taking the Russian MoD statements at face value. History Legends and Weeb Union are probably better English speaking pro-Kremlin daily update channels as they likely get their information from Russian telegram channels and not the Russian MoD. Maybe Defence Politics Asia too though I struggled to understand the guys accent when I watched his videos last year.
On the other side a Ukrainian leaning anti-bullshitium daily update channel is Military and History run by a German guy called Torsten, yes he's biased towards Ukraine but he at least only talks about he can actually confirm with visual evidence, he will mention rumours but if he hasn't seen evidence of whatever it is that is claimed he will say that as well.
For big picture stuff Perun is one of the best channels on YouTube. It's a military-economics channel, the guy running it works for the Australian Department of Defence but the channel is not connected to the Australian government, so while most of the videos (hour long PowerPoint presentations, if you've been to university his videos feel like a university lecture) are on Ukraine and Russia he branches out and does videos on the militarys of other nations like Germany, France, China, and South Korea. He's also biased towards Ukraine, he openly admits that in one of his early videos so he's not pretending to be neutral while promoting one side, but he also has an hour long video on what the Russian military is good at and he usually stresses the point that they are still a dangerous opponent despite their failings.
Also you won't find any truly neutral or non-biased analysis channels, they are all run by humans and so are subject to human failings and biases. Best you can do is find channels that have minimum levels of copium, hopium, and bullshitium.
Actually it's Military & History not Military and History, though it will probably come up in a YouTube search if you go looking for it. The profile picture is one of those WW1 era German spiky helmets (pickelhaube)
Thank you very much for the interesting sources. I'll start watching. Finally someone with a factual post without ideology. What a refresher. Truth is, I've been following the Military Summary one for a relatively short time, and I didn't find some of the stuff in there very interesting. By the way, do you know the channel "Reporting from Ukraine"? That strikes me as strongly pro-Ukrainian.
Yeah I've watched Reporting from Ukraine. I stopped after noticing he had a habit of predicting major gains from small advances which didn't come true, or if they did were much slower than he predicted so they didn't have a major effect on the situation in that particular sector. I'm pro-Ukraine so while I think his heart is on the right place his videos had far too much hopium for me to consider him a reputable source.
Thanks Tom, your assessment is the missing piece of the puzzle that none of the warmappers can bring to the table.
Would it be fair to say that Robotyne is the most difficult yet highest-value target for the ZSU at the moment? Looking at the maps with fortifications it would seem as the hardest to be assaulted to date, incl. batches and lines of trees that seem to be precious to RU defenses. Yet, if Robotyne was taken it could also provide the most options to ZSU? It would be the closest point to to the main fortification line of the South, also the closest to Tokmak, but ZSU could also choose to move westward toward the Dnipro to clear more maneuver area and keep their options more open.
....though where it's 'easy' to make it the 'most problematic' - by pitting an entire Russian combined arms army, entrenched behind a deep belt of mines vs. 2, now 3 ZSU brigades...
The obvious move is for Ukraine to take Tokmak and then Militopol or perhaps Berdyansk and cut the Russian land bridge to Crimea. Russia knows this and is doing everything to prevent it. From the Russian perspective Robotyne is about preventing Ukraine from getting to Tokmak. Sort of like Gettysburg - a place without much instrinsic strategic value, Robotyne might just turn out to be the place where the Russian and Ukranian armies fight it out.
Thank you for this report. According to last information which I’ve seen in DeepState VSRF didn’t capture Novoegorivka but has a lot of artillery in that place and push new and new forces on the bridgehead from Karmazinivka. Now ZSU using reserves and heavy shell pontoons across the river in order to cut off supply.
Can you explain what value has Robotyne for VSRF and ZSU: what is possible to happen, when ZSU will capture it?
In last package Germany sent 10 laser illuminators for last version of Vulcan guided shell. Can it be used for destroying of moving targets or just stationary?
And also have you seen last article of Wall Street Journal that West knew that they didn’t get enough weapon and ammunition for succesful contreoffensive and hoped on “battle spirit and bravery”
Re. Novojehorivka: out of curiosity....where do you and where does the DeepState get the info that this....erm.... 'area' is in Russian hands, that they have a pontoon bridge and thus a bridgehead there?
Robotyne per se: has no value. BUT, it's a place 'south' or 'on the other side' of the 10km deep minefield. The area where the ZSU can hope to start conducting manoeuvre warfare.
Laser-guided weapons can be used to target moving targets: just point the laser at the target and keep it pointed at the target.
.....the question is: how 'easy' is to keep the laser marker pointed at the target....
Yes, and no surprise. Just got fed up of commenting such Western idiocies. There are limits of sarcasm....
I would argue with you on the importance of Robotyne. The town itself isn't important, but the distance between northern part of Robotyne and southern part of Tokmak is about 27km. If ZSU could occupy Robotyne, they could obliterate the railways in Tokmak with regular tube arty. If they could somehow take out the Kerch railway bridge, they could make the supplying of Russian forces west of Tokmak really difficult. (See how Russia struggled with supplying its forces attacking Kyiv back in 2022).
We're in the middle of a war in which Robotyne is a heavily mined place in a heavily mined part of Ukraine. As such, it's of no use for anybody else but for Russian attempts to make Ukrainian effort to liberate it too costly.
And even if Robotyne would be completely liberated within the next 5 minutes, it's going to take 10 years to de-mine it safely enough for civilians to return.
Meanwhile, it's going to take at least 2 weeks to de-mine enough space to drive that artillery that could reach Tokmak into Robotyne, by when the place is going to be demolished to such a degree - and that by both the Russian and Ukrainian artillery - that there's going to be no cover for that artillery left.
Should there be any doubts: check the situation inside Staromaiorske and Urozhaine...
As you said earlier: war is about adaptation. You can adapt to the lack of cover, for example you know where the rails are, you can bring in some arty at night, shot a few rounds to known coordinates and pull those guns back immediately. You don't need to shot exact targets (ie trucks, trains, etc.) You just need to target a larger railway junction and that's it.
This could be efficient enough and fairly safe. Russian night vision capabilities aren't the best. This is how ZSU operated its HIMARSes earlier. Of course Russia can find a way to adapt to this, but then you just need to come up with some new idea.
Thanks Tom I really enjoyed this report the UAF is exacting a toll on the Rats and contrary to MSM saying the counteroffensive is finished, they are making good progress while not advancing at great speed they are taking out the Russians all the time
Thank you for another update, Tom. It gives some positive vision of situation, while numerous Telegram channels are not so much promising nova day. God bless ZSU.
One question remains to me which I guess is hard to estimate: If Ukrainians are killing thousands of troops, is that more than Putin can secretly mobilise in the same period of time or is it more/less?
Putin is not 'secretly' mobilising: he's publicly declared the mobilisation. The problem is that the VSRF can't accept all the mobiks it would like to have. It only has a capacity to accept, equip, organise and train around 15,000-20,000 a month. So, as long as ZSU is shooting away more than that - whether dead, wounded, missing or whatever - the 'plot' is working...
As far as I got it, what got publicly got announced is that the partial mobilisation is over since i think February or so. Not that I believe a word that they are saying and from my experience Russians are anyway bound in their actions to what they articulate to you anyway.
Hence, your capacity argument is the most logical conclusion. Let's hope the Ukrainians are not running out of ammo.
Sadly, in regards of ammo, the ZSU is meanwhile almost entirely - and thus hopelessly - overdependent on the West. And the West is more depending on its hopes about Ukrainian spirits and the will to fight, than on rapidly expanding own production capacities.....
Regarding mobilization. Putler started it by signing an executive order. When was asked to sign another order to stop mobilization he said he had consulted with "jurists" and new order is not needed. Mobilization is over he said. But now there are court decisions that exactly says - mobilization is not over , so ru soldiers could not break their contracts (which will be in force till the end of mobilization)
I wonder if part of the reason for the attacks on Odessa are that the ethnic Russians haven't risen up to support him, and therefore aren't real Russians. Not that I disagree that there is a strong element of appearing strong, or just lashing out where he can
But entire idea of "ethnical russians" or "russia speaking" should support russia is illusion.
How can a big country has completelly fake assumption, which is easy to check by running a survey or research?.
If France invades Switzerland, Sahara states, Canada or Belgium, noone expect franco-speaking people to rebell against own goverment and support France.
Its stupid to think that if a guy speak polish, german russian - he will support russia or poland.
I am not defending the assumption, just that it has been part of their own crazy talking points and PRBS. "Ukraine is Russia." Even now they claim everyone really supports being taken over by Russia. They even "voted" for it.
When they lost battle of Kyiv in March, I read myself in some russian propogandist ( maybe Soloviov ) said: "it's because Ukrainians are actually russians, that's why they fight so good, just like russians"
There have been so many assumptions, it’s hard to keep up.
Argument 1.They started the war because people of Donbas asked them for help, and how could any Russian say no when another Russian asks them for help.
Debunk 1. There are Russians in FL that are asking to be part of Russia. Russian response? None.
Argument 2. Denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine. There are Nazis in Ukraine and they’re ready to attack mother Russia.
Debunk 2. There are more Nazi groups in Russia than in Ukraine.
Argument 3. They stopped water to Crimea.
Debunk 3. Let’s say you own a house and somebody breaks in to it. They say now part of the house is theirs. Now do you provide utilities to that part of the house? I don’t think so.
Argument 4. Dumbing of Bombass. The Ukrainians are bombing innocent people of Donbas.
Debunk 4. Propaganda. An English crew did a documentary. Every time somebody on Donetsk TV said that a person has been killed by Ukrainian bombing. The crew would go to the site and try to find any evidence. There was no bodies in the morgue, no blowout scars, no nobody knew anything about 9it. People on the scene said the same thing. It didn’t happen here.
Thanks for the update, Tom. Any I sight on the latest media focus near the Poland border with Lithuania? There seems seems to be some saver rattling about ‘closing the gap‘
Interesting deepstate are reporting some RF gains in Kupians direction. There are also reports that Vesele was taken by the RF and that they kicked VSU from Staromayorsk. Let`s hope your report are correct and RF is taking much more loses then VSU, so that could lead latter to some real gains.
(BTW: you're still owing me answers to your last questions. if you do not start responding, I'll start considering your posts here for trolling. And trolling me leads to a ban. Your choice.)
What question you are talking about ? If you mean about the Wagner incident is because people were posting this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V22Cwgc1_co and I still don`t see any explanation why RF will lie that they lost special IL plane and not old transport, even posting the necrology of the deceased crew members. The Deepstate map changes I saw from here https://t.me/stranaua/115481 . The other info I saw in some pro-Russian channels, it supposed to be internal and proves are not provided. Is it true or not I can’t tell, fog of war is working as expected this time, which is showing both sides are getting better at hiding critical information.
Great read as always. Your last sentence sums it up perfectly. The failure of the Ukrainian offensive is not a good omen for the future. Yes, I consider this offensive a failure, even if in technical terms it is still unresolved and ongoing. We are at plan C, D, E of the ZSU? Almost 2 months of fighting to achieve what exactly? It seems that the ZSU has received everything to conduct an offensive (except the airforce), that it is incapable of conducting, while not receiving enough for attrition warfare that it knows how to fight.
It doesn't matter how much VSRF cannon fodder dies because with the current trends, it will take another 10 years to make a remotely noticeable dent given the Russian population. Since the first general mobilisation a year ago, the VSRF commanders have made a systemic decision to forego any offensive capability and instead focus purely on preserving their elite core. Whatever was left of veteran units, are always staying behind. Only fresh conscripts are sent to the front, resulting in massive casualties on paper, but actually few casualties from the point of view of the VSRF. The absolute peak of this system were Wagner convicts, but the same model has been used all across the VSRF. Therefore, what the ZSU are doing is ineffective, inefficient, pointless and leads to nowhere. Until the ZSU starts destroying entire armies and the veteran core of brigades, divisions etc., nothing will change.
Russia cannot win this militarily, but it can prevent the loss of already occupied territory. Basing the entire strategy on Russia imploding economically and/or politically, is a really bad way of conducting a war.
No it does not, if that was the case then the front would've collapsed many weeks ago. The amount of resources to sustain tens of thousands of soldiers in combat is well known and not a secret. The ZSU are not even remotely close to repeating the carnage at the rear of VSRF when the first HIMARS arrived.
You say "Whatever was left of veteran units, are always staying behind."
However, the "behind" bases are blasted on weekly basis. Together with the units that populate them.
Moreover, would you please provide the reason for keeping experienced units out of combat for months while losing armor and howitzers because they are assigned to novices?
As far as I have learnt so far, the reason is the self-preservation among the VSRF commanders and veterans with influence. I doubt this was an official order from Gerasimov. It is a result of the Russian sick, barbaric mentality. It seems that e.g. a company was reduced from 100 to 20 people and is now being constantly replenished with mobiks & reservists. Those 20 people are senior and combat experienced so are in command. Therefore, they only send those fresh 80 recruits, squander them, get new ones, squander them and so on, while doing everything so that they themselves avoid being at risk. Wagner convicts were a perfect example of this system.
The VSRF are losing relatively few armoured vehicles these days, with the emphasis on relatively. Howitzers is a different story because the artillery is specialist and should always be at the rear. They are not losing artillery because of mobiks, or at least not directly. The ZSU counter-battery fire has massively improved and that is a fantastic development.
This is not really the case. That is, throughout the war RuFOR has relied on poorly-organized spoiling attacks anywhere they could to pin UFOR. The problem is, most RuFOR losses, including in materiel, occur in these ill-conceived and wasteful assaults.
Going by Oryx/Warspotting, armored losses would be 1:1 over the past two months if considering only the southern theater. During the winter offensive period, mid-January to mid-March, they were more like 5:1 in UFOR's favor. But because of the ongoing Russian counteroffensive in Kharkiv and Donetsk, globally those losses are 1.5:1 in UFOR's favor. Which is to say, 2: to 3:1 losses in favor of UFOR where RuFOR is attacking.
To a *certain* extent your description of mobik-heavy units is correct, but it is not correct that the VSRF has systematically spared its elite core. The relatively-recent formalization (the innovation began last summer) of "storm companies" (task forces) relies on experienced and picked infantry, Spetsnaz are regularly used as first-line tactical reserve and as an auxiliary to VSRF attacks, and up-to-date equipment such as T-72B3, T-90M, and BMP-3 are routinely lost in these sorties.
Even in the case of Wagner, according to Prigozhin - though we may expect some PR exaggeration in this regard - the ratio of KIA was the same among professionals as it was among convicts.
I've said since a full year ago that Putin would do best to fully commit to a defensive strategy. rather than doubling down on institutional core incompetencies. It would be one thing if in theory they had assembled serious offensive plans, for example to punch through the static Zaporizhzhia front to a sufficient extent to place a Ukrainian southern offensive out of contemplation. Or maybe a reverse-Kharkiv this summer given how deprioritized by UFOR the theater is, to secure the strategic river boundary and redirect the surplus to the south. But we can see that Putin/GSRU are a mixture of unwilling, and perceiving of the VSRF as incapable. Yet their perfunctory tactical pressure is literally their primary source of disadvantageous attrition in all essential categories.
I broadly agree but I do not think you are actually replying to what I said. Making generalisations is always limited, so we must remember that there is a lot of variety. Firstly, I am talking about 2023, kherson liberated, general mobilisation called in Russia. One thing is how different units are used, 1st line, reserve etc., and a whole other thing is what happens inside these units. These are not mutually exclusive. I said elite, veteran core of a unit, not elite units e.g. spetsnaz. Two different things. It is clear that there is a veteran and command core in each unit that lives despite said unit suffering crushing casualties. Otherwise many VSRF units wouldn't exist anymore. That is not the case. They exist and are constantly replenished with conscripts. The casualties in the veteran soldiers are being minimised when possible, instead sending poorly trained freshly mobilised to bear the brunt of casualties.
This does not mean, that those that survived the initial phase of the invasion no longer die. It doesn't mean that elite units don't suffer casualties. However, there are numerous sources on both sides that corroborate that the mobiks are disproportionately at risk and not just because they themselves are poorly trained. One common tactic, in particular at bakhmut but not only there, was recon by fire, send mobiks or convicts to find out where the ZSU are and then either assault with veterans or call artillery.
As far as equipment loss ratios are concerned. Again, that is not what I meant. Ratio may be the same but the overall amount of equipment is different (smaller iirc) and the type of equipment has changed. VSRF losses nowadays are much more artillery heavy, which is great news. There are many reasons for this, primarily less heavy equipment in the VSRF and the focus on artillery duels.
According to Oryx Russia has lost over two thousand tanks, two and a half thousand infantry fighting vehicles and around one thousand armoured fighting vehicles so it is not surprising they are losing fewer when they have fewer to lose.
They *are* losing artillery. This was one of the reasons for the latest conflict amongst their generals where the guy who complained about the lack of counter-battery systems was removed from office.
Russia could not prevent losing the territories it had occupied in the Kiev and Sumy regions. Russia could not prevent losing the territories it had occupied in the Kharkiv region.
Russia could not prevent losing a large part of the territories it had occupied in the Kherson region.
I don't like repeating myself but if you ask. That the ZSU must learn how to scale offensive operations. Attrition warfare is not a viable military strategy for a country fighting on its own territory, with a small economy, no industry, no equipment stock and a significantly smaller pool of military personnel.
Russia never occupied Kyiv or Sumy regions. It occupied eastern Kharkiv and that was the one significant offensive success of the ZSU. Also, it was caused by a giant mistake by the VSRF, a mistake they clearly are not planning on repeating. As far as Kherson is concerned, once the VSRF offensive on the north bank of Dnipro was stopped, that area ultimately became undefendable, but they still resisted for months and withdrew in good order.
VSRF can prevent the loss of territory and it has been doing it for almost a year now. Have you noticed? You believe in what feels good to you. At the moment the ZSU is hoping that Russia will implode or that the VSRF will implode or that the West does something. Their entire plan is hoping that somebody or something does their job for them. The VSRF are currently making the most of their bad situation and unfortunately it seems enough for now.
If Russia did not occupy Kyiv region, the Bucha accounts should be all fake.
And they had to announce the general population evacuation from Kherson to use civilians for a human shield to "withdraw in a good order".
While Germany was on offensive taking territory for years in WW2 nobody cried that there was no sense to fight it. And you are panicking after a few months of stalemate.
Wtf? The Russians never stabilised these areas because they were contested. The VSRF were there for about a month. Were unable to create any occupational authority. This is just arguing semantics and is pointless.
I am not panicking as it makes no difference to my life whether Ukraine exists, which doesn't mean I don't have preferences. Do you require for everyone to only praise Ukraine and massage their asses? There has been no progress for a year, that means time-wise most of the war since the full-scale invasion, the ZSU have achieved no forward movement. There are deep structural and organisational problems that remain unresolved. Before Ukrainians complain about the West that owes them nothing, maybe they should sort out their pigsty first. Where is the fight against corruption that is devouring the state and the armed forces?
The lands weren’t occupied, the marauders just wanted to pillage and rape. So it was raids, by an occupying force. The Russians wanted to occupy, they just couldn’t hold on to it. Am I getting your point?
Pretty much yes, they tried but failed to properly occupy those areas. There were active engagements inside the entirety of these regions. Hence, the VSRF never actually fully secured any of these territories.
Man, there are priorities. Survival is always the first priority, health is the second. The corruption can be dealt with after the war as fighting it will require structural changes that may shock many of the country's mechanisms which should be functional to keep fighting now.
Please keep in memory the story of Hitler's collecting resources for WW2. It was the West that allowed him to annex the industrial regions of Czechoslovakia boosting the Nazis' industry and morale. After that stopping them costed millions of lives. Now the West does not want to repeat the history. They push for Putin's defeat for their own safety's sake.
They didn't occupy it because they were there for about a month and it was contested. They never created a stable occupational authority there. They never even had control over an area but only over the logistical routes. They didn't even capture Sumy itself. Do you really insist on arguing semantics?
When can an occupation of anybody’s land be called stable? I don’t think Russia still have full control of Donbas region. I mean there are mysterious explosions happening in Donbas and Crimea that nobody can explain.
When you are controlling an area, not just a city, town or road, and you have occupational authorities set up including security services. When you pay actual salaries to civilians. Being within the range of long range missiles is irrelevant and sabotage activities are also irrelevant as they are par for the course of an occupation. People here really love arguing semantics just to be contrarian, acting as if they were stupid. It is clear what I am referring to, call it whatever you feel like. You really don't see any difference between Sumy and Crimea?
I considered you a harmless do gooder, but I am now convinced you're an idiot. Education in your country has failed you and produced a person who lacks basic reading comprehension. Show me what territory has been liberated since Kherson a year ago? Better to stay silent and seem stupid, than to open your mouth and clear all the doubt.
Some recent anecdotes and my commentary about the ZSU that I found very interesting:
1. A SOF unit lost a commander and had multiple wounded, somewhere on the Southern front. The unit was tasked to mop up a freshly taken fortified position on a hill. Except, the Mech infantry that was supposed to take it, failed and the SOF didn't find out until they found themselves assaulting a significantly larger Russian force, fortified, on a hill. Multiple supporting vehicles destroyed, commander dead, many wounded, barely managed to withdraw. The ZSU must be the richest military on the planet to squander their SOF on assaulting trenches.
2. Rumour is that the NATO training in Eastern Europe (mostly Poland) and Scandinavia (I assume it also includes Finland) is good, but the Western European training is often low quality, rigid and wastes a lot of time, because it is rarely adapted to the different levels of experience of the Ukrainian units that are taking part. However, on the other hand, there are also complaints about the Ukrainian trainees. One case was a Ukrainian unit that was trained using a MILES system. The absolute morons took the batteries out of their vests so that they "win" the training sessions. Those retards are a danger to other ZSU units, let alone themselves, and should frankly either be only working in the deep rear or sent as meat assaults. The absolute worst Ukrainian trainees, are those that have fought for a few weeks, had some basic training years ago (so not that young) and now think they are amazing, know everything better and treat training abroad as if these were holidays. Young, freshly mobilised with no prior military experience are fine, they want to learn, they listen, they put a lot of effort. Yet another data point showing how the ZSU is an army of extremes and two different mentalities.
3. An example that corroborates what Tom has pointed out many times before. The difference between well trained units and numpties is enormous. A National Guard battalion was fighting for 11 months without rotation. Theoretically part of the Slovyansk grouping. However, due to being highly dependable, its elements were thrown to plug gaps wherever things got desperate. In 11 months, they suffered 40% irrecoverable casualties. However, only 22 KIA. The battalion that finally rotated them out, was part of the professional/contract army. That batallion suffered 18 KIA on the first day and lost 2 positions. Within 3 months, they suffered 240 KIA. Conclusions? Including the wounded, the entire unit was basically destroyed twice. Tom wrote in the past about how the 92dn (or 93rd?) Mech managed to hold the entire front north of Bakhmut on its own for months and then everything started collapsing despite multiple brigades replacing them. This is why, war does not tolerate stupid. What is worrying is that there does not seem to be a visible improvement in the quality of training conducted by the ZSU. Same useless instructors, often from the "past", resistant to change, keep on producing badly trained soldiers who are then taught to fight by Darwin. In that sense, the ZSU is very "Russian". The quality of training depends purely on the unit you are assigned to. It can be anything from so useless you are definitely going to die and take all your colleagues with you, to the best in the world. There are no standards across the ZSU.
4. Corruption is back with a vengeance. I was surprised to hear that it ever went away, I guess it was somewhat suppressed until recently. You can pay bribes for everything. Bribe to cross the border with NATO. Bribe to not get mobilised. Bribe to be sent to "better" units. Bribe to get "better" or at least safer positions in the army. Whatever you can imagine, you can probably pay a bribe for it. Plenty of young, healthy men in Ukraine and abroad "waiting" to be called, while the actual units are getting high-quality recruits: middle-aged (or worse), unfit, unhealthy, often alcoholics, usually desperately poor (no money for bribes) and unfortunately also often stupid. Remember Tom's recent post on his Facebook page about 1 officer out of 42 fit for the officer course? What a fantastic way to sabotage not just your own army, but your entire country and nation, that is fighting for survival.
The ZSU must progress to win the war, not regress. “A little Soviet army cannot defeat a big Soviet army”.
Which part of defending vs beating/attacking isn't clear? Also, are you now arguing that Zaluzhny doesn't know what he is talking about as well? Are you just going to be contrarian for the sake of it?
The Russian army under Chernihiv was attacked and expelled. Same holds for the northern Kyiv and Zhytomyr regions. Same holds for eastern Kharkiv region. Any questions?
I don't know how to explain this in english any better. What you are referring to is defending against the vsrf offensive. This is completely different from conducting offensives yourself. It is an obvious fact that we are watching unfold in real time ffs. I don't understand why you are struggling to understand this. This isn't complicated. If you still don't understand this after this comment than please stop replying to me.
I have not seen any significant changes in territory control on the ISW maps for months. Thus, the "not a little territory" is too small to notice at the overall scale.
People keep telling me the sanctions are not working.
Thank you for informing us they are,
What you are writing here is not facts, but your personal opinion. And you know nothing about "the West" or who is interested in what for what reason. What you are doing is spreading the Russian narrative that the evil "West" is not interested in Eastern Europe blah blah blah.
He, and his previous incarnations have been writing that staff since days when Tom was publishing on Medium.
Oh! Alex Koval is back.
And thought you are Konashenkov's persona... but you just old poor Alex Koval.
I’m not sure what provoked that outburst, but take care of yourself.
Alex Koval (a pathetic ruzzian troll) has got himself a new profile and is babbling again about the same old story..
Hey Tom, I’m just going to mention that Odessa port, the one you see on pictures from the Duke down Potemkin stairs is actually a passenger port, the grain elevators are probably 50 kilometers away. The Spaso-Preobrazhenaky Sobor is in the center of the city about 2 kilometers as the crow flies from the Duke inland. The monument to Voronzov is located in the square right outside. The house with Atlante sculpture is down the street. This is what every Odessit knows as part of the old city. There is no military objects anywhere in sight.
Of course not. But, Pudding needs 'evidence for Nazi genocide on Russians in Ukraine'.
He would get more of it Galicina or Lvov, than in Odessa. Recently saw a poll that said there are more Russian speakers, and therefore, more transgrations in Odessa than anywhere in Ukraine.
I bet entire Odesa will switch to Ukrainian languadge after this week.
It happend to Kyiv. 20 years ago noone spoke Ukrainian, and now everyone speak only Ukrainian in Kyiv.
Everyone I know from Kharkiv switched to Ukrainian. Very good quality, even guys from Carpathians asked where they learned such a pure academical Ukrainian pronounsiation and broad vocabular.
Thats opposite to what russians expected
I don’t think what language one speaks is necessarily a good indication of loyalty.
I’ll give you a couple of examples:
Last year I was visiting family in Berlin, while Okean Elzy was playing there. So, we decided to go to show our support. When we got there very few people were actually speaking Ukrainian, most of them being refugees from Donbas and Kharkiv areas. P. S.: Trivia time. in 2014, Okean Elzy was playing to sold out crowd at Chornomorets Stadium in Odessa, guess what was the only song they played in Russian ever? I’ll give you a hint. It was “there’s a city, I know...”, colloquially known as anthem of Odessa.
2. A lot of war clips still have Ukrainian soldiers, from different regions, speaking to each other in Russian.
Zaluzhny, Zelensky, Arestovich, and almost the entire government all speak Russian first. That does not make any of them any less Ukrainian.
Arestovich is a ruzzian simp biatch.
Syrskiy was raised as a russian speaking boy + education, same with Zelenskiy.
Zaluzhniy was born and raised in Novohrad-Volysnkiy, so his native/mother tongue was Ukrainian, no doubt. Surely, his studies and being in Odesa made him adjust to the situation to be accepted (as MANY Ukrainians from Ukraine who came to Adessa only to be subjected to humiliation for speaking "hill billy" language. Yep, Yurik, that shit is personal for me, you can guess %).
All in all, ruzzian language be gone.
bloody ruzzian "adessit" suka blyat
You forgot Nazi and lgbtq+, asshole
ruzzian nazi? sure, thinking one is karrenoi adessit makes one a ruzzian nazi, no doubt.
Not am I only korenoy odessit, (I never lived on moldavanka) so I actually pronounce words properly, but I am korenoy odessit, because my mother was raised in Odessa, my father was raised in Odessa, my grandparents from both side were raised in Odessa, their parents on both sides were raised in Odessa. Which makes you an “adessit” troll, and a “shesterka” and “petuh”.
A language that somebody uses should never be used as a weapon. There are Swiss who use German and French. There are British, as well as, Americans who know and use multiple languages and the languages I choose to communicate in are English and Russian. I know Ukrainian, I even have a copy of “Kobzar”, but it’s not my main language. I also love Pushkin and listen to many different genres of music, including “Okean Elzy” and “Bez Obmezhin”. And more importantly I don’t put people down and on top of all that the only thing I’d say to you, dear cur, is why aren’t you fighting in the war. There are a lot of Russian speakers out there who have been fighting since 2014, and a lot of them gave their all so you and I can have a dumb conversation about who’s a real Odessit and who’s a wanna be.
What about the gay satanic nazi meetings? Maybe these are held there?
Well, there are a lot LGBTQ+ people in Odessa, you know, the warm climate and all that. Not sure if they associate themselves with Nazis especially from Azov regiment, but I did read an article recently about gay soldiers in Ukrainian army, have not read any articles about Gays in Russian army, officially they frown on that in Russian Army, although I did see a couple of videos of soldiers being affectionate with each other in the tranches and behind the stairs. I do know that there was a boy in bed in Russian Orthodox Church - Moscow patriarchate in Kievsky Lavry. So, does that answer your question?
You convinced me xD but have you convinced Russians? :)
I don’t need to convince Russians of anything. It’s like Michael Chriton book where he says it’s a lot easier to convince a psycho that he’s not a monkey. Just give him a mirror and a photo of a monkey and let him figure it out.
Hi, I regularly follow you, Simplicius and Military summary channel and it feels like I'm watching two completely different wars. I'd so love to follow one objective channel with just military facts without ideology, but unfortunately there probably isn't one.
Spot on. I just always thought Tom Copper was just slightly pro-Ukraine. But judging by the almost hysterical reactions of some of the debaters and himself, I can see that he is strongly pro-Ukrainian or rather very anti-Russian. I'm always shocked by the existence of social bubbles where it is virtually impossible for people with opposite views to the majority audience to discuss.
I'm interested how do you even get here if you watch/read that russian BS spreading sources?
I'm balancing. This is a slightly pro-Ukrainian view. The other two sources are slightly pro-Russian. I like to balance and seek the truth. I like substantive discussion. BS spreading is just your label.
This is what exactly I do - put labels on sources which spreads fakes, and forget about them. Like this Sipmplicius for example. But it's your choice of what to consume of course.
Specifically with Simplicius, I haven't yet detected any intentional fakes so far. If you know of any specific intentional fakes, please share. I only note some incomplete reporting of events or misrepresentation with him. But unfortunately I encounter that here as well (among other things). As I wrote. I haven't found an objective source yet.
"I haven't found an objective source yet."
🤭🤭🤭🤭
You try to find a black cat in the dark room of War.
Impossible.
Information will never be completely objective, but some source of information might be. For example, Strana.ua is an objective source and yet it is Ukrainian media. Unfortunately, it is not focused on the military.
What exactly are you balancing? If Russia would leave Ukraine, the war would stop. Period. End of story.
What you write is utter nonsense. The fair thing to do would be to hold a referendum in different parts of Ukraine under the auspices of the international community, with the possibility of giving a voice to also those inhabitants who have left because of the war. And based on the result, the land in question would go to Russia or Ukraine. This seems fair to me. The land is made up of people and they should have a say in where they want to belong. If it followed what you wrote, there would be a genocide of the people of Crimea and Danbas after the Russians left.
Oh, I get it. You’re pro-Russian. Well, have a good day, sir. Enjoy your polemics somewhere else, please.
Oh, yeah, you got me. Strange that when I argue or disagree with something on pro Russian forums people there don't feel the need to call me a pro Urkain, Ukrofasit or whatever. They are much more tolerant. This labeling always happens from people who are blinded by Urkain ideology. But you're Ukrainian by name, so that excuses you.
But I still wonder what's so pro-Russian about wanting people to decide to be pro-Russian themselves. Unless you're worried they'll choose Russia.
Please inform yourself properly. A referendum was held in Ukraine back in 1991, and the majority of Ukrainians clearly voted for remaining in Ukraine (so also on the Crimea, where more than 55% voted pro Ukraine; the percentage was even higher in the Donbas).
...and there is only one character who can stop this war at any point in time - withdraw his slaves and declare a victory. And nothing would happen to him, just like nothing happened to him when he declared the war in Syria for 'over', and a 'general withdrawal of the Russian Group of Forces'. Three times.
Correspondingly, explaining Yury that he's writing 'utter nonsense' - when he's bringing it to the point....hm...
Yes, in 1991, people in Ukraine and Crimea believed that Ukraine would prosper and defend the interests of its citizens. Ukraine fared better than the Baltic States and Russia. And the year 2013 came. And after more than 20 years, how is Ukraine doing. Corruption itself. I was in Ukraine in 2003 and 2004. I was also in Crimea and I know how things worked there, what was the mood of the residents. The people were totally fed up with what the oligarchs had done to their country. So already in 2013, if there was an independent referendum, the results are quite different. I was on the Maidan in 2014 and I know how the people who rioted there were paid...etc. But with that comment you clearly show your "ideology".
I am fascinated by the idea of people proposing a referendum because people have the right to decide where they want to live. Changing national borders on the basis of referendums forced by armed conflict would set a precedent and create incredible chaos in the way the world works. Above all, who will determine when and in what case a referendum is held? Russia is a multi-ethnic state, will you insist that each nation can determine whether it wants to be part of Russia? Staying closer to your country, are you in favour of the Hungarian minority in the south of Slovakia having the right to decide in a referendum whether they want to annex part of Slovakia to Hungary? The same goes for the Hungarian minority in Serbia. Let's face it, Orbán would like this idea very much, as he has stood firm against the breakup of the great Hungary. Do you really think that this is the ideal and better world you want to live in and ensure peace and contentment for the majority of people in the world?
I gave the referendum as an example in the context of a response to another post. Don't see it in isolation. So in other words, 90% of the population of Crimea and Donetsk do not want to be part of Ukraine. It's just that some pro-Ukrainian people probably don't believe that, so I gave the referendum as an example.
Human disputes tend not to be resolved according to fairness, or there would not be wars. Russia, as the party with direct control over the regions in question, is the only actor in place to carry your proposal forward in the international stage. But surely you are aware that they have always categorically rejected it. The Russian aim is to secure more control over Ukraine entirely as a state, by which to accumulate more power to shape global affairs. The question of the wishes of a group of people living in a particular territory is no more relevant to them than it was to the Romans, the Castilians, or, well, the Russians at any other time in history.
Your premises are thus based in categorical errors.
Ok. So, I'll give you one opportunity to demonstrate your skills in online-psychoanalisis.
What is my ideology, please?
No problem. I'll give you some examples. Calling Putin Pudding, if the Ukrainians lose somewhere, he's going to rate it with "unfortunately". Just a few hours after Kakhovka, you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Russians blew it. And the general tone of the comments about the Russians and ridiculing them, and when they do get something right you are often not mentioned it. Emphasizing primarily their losses and their losses. That's not to say that you never criticize Urkaina, but you are significantly less so and much more conciliatory towards her. And to give a positive example. For me, the most objectively reported news outlet is Strana.ua. And it is a Ukrainian source at that.
mfer really cites Strana.ua as an objective source. Не пизди
I do not understand. Do you think he is on the side of Ukraine or Russia? It's hard for Russia if he's Ukrainian. And for the fact that it is a Ukrainian source, it is much more objective than our Czech mainstream media.
No problem! As a Ukrainian, it was just a bit funny to see that you cite Страна UA as an objective source and I thought you were from Russia. Before the war started, it was a pro-Russian newspaper that promoted many fake stories. I remember it was ranked with the worst results of compliance with professional journalist standards. How do you assess its objectivity?
This really surprises me and is new information for me. They are often quoted from local media that I trust and I follow them on Telegram, where they come to me in OK. And if I look that they are based in Kyiv (https://strana.news/about.html), then if they were against Urkajin, they no longer work.
try this one https://www.youtube.com/@andrewperpetua/streams
Google is your friend. If you’re allowed to use it.
Psss, can I let you in on a little secret? In my infinite wisdom, and according to the stars, I declare that Ukraine is going to win. Maybe slowly, but it’s going to win. Mark my words. Thank you all, you’ve been a wonderful audiences, don’t forget to tip the waiters on your way out.
It depends on what you mean by a Ukrainian victory. For me, the victory of ordinary Ukrainians and Russians would be to end the War as soon as possible and people would stop dying.
Он не только про страну.юа пиздит. По-моему он и про то что он из бушей Чехословакии пиздит.
Sigh.... I've asked what is my ideology?
You ddin't even try to address that question.
If you do not know, you could've at least asked. That's indicating either
a) a latent lack of communication skills, or
b) that your presence here is insincere.
Considering you're jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions, ignoring my question (i.e. can't communicate) and can't understand something I wrote (like why did I come to the conclusion that it's the Russians who mined the Kakhovka Dam), conclusion is on hand that the answer is 'b'.
....and that's something I consider for trolling. And I ban trolls without any further discussions.
Would you, please, go wasting somebody else's time, somewhere else - or do I have to ban you?
Thanks a lot - in advance.
My native language is not English, so I probably perceive the meaning of the word ideology differently. According to your expression and the last post elsewhere, your narrative is pro-Ukrainian - and that is ideology for me. And I read almost all of your posts and nowhere was it explained why you believe it was the Russians. They were just guesses. I had other information that showed that it could easily be Ukraine. I wanted to argument with you, but you expressly forbade it.
....still wasting time with guessing and jumping to conclusions - instead of asking...?
You didn't want me to ask. You wrote that I should play a psychoanalyst, so I fulfilled your wish. But I asked about the Kachovská Dam and I still didn't get an answer.
The Czech word for ideology is ideologie so it should not be so difficult for you to understand.
According to the Czech version of Wikipedia; "Ideology is an elaborate set of opinions, attitudes, values and ideas with an apologetic or offensive function based on the formulation of the political, economic, worldview and/or similar interests of a particular group."
https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideologie
https://www.understandingwar.org/
This is not an objective and independent source. I read somewhere that it is covertly funded by some government agency. I can't find it now. But the truth is that they are probably the most objective.
Their maps are based on facts and their predictions realize in nearly 50% of cases.
50% of cases doesn't seem like much to me. It's one of the more objective ones. But the important thing is who's funding them. That doesn't guarantee impartiality for me.
Who is funding you?
Unfortunately no one. Don't want to donate?
ISW is NOT funded by the British government!🤦
You're right. I was verifying it now. However, I read somewhere that it is covertly funded by some government agency. I can't find it now. But the truth is that they are probably the most objective.
Perhaps it's 'covertly funded by some government agency', but primarily it's a privately-owned think-tank, foremost serving different PMCs.
I do understand that to many people this sounds incredible, and 'can't be' and whatever else, but that's the way things work in the USA almost since the country was established as an independent and sovereign state. That's called 'private and corporate interests'.
I fully agree.
From my opimion, Tom copper is the best when it comes to tactical OSINT analisis. He speaks his opinions bends to noone and prone to sarcasm :). Some times he wonders into politics behind conflicts.
You are right. That's why I read it. However, this does not mean that he is right in everything and has a "patent of reason". That's why I also read other sources.
And honestly, sarcasm is exactly something that bothers me in general in all people.
Then do yourself a big favour and don't read.
The reading did not do you any good so far.
It doesn't do me any good to sit at a computer for hours at a time into the night, fending off hateful attacks from people like you. From people who don't want to debate but just want to spread their ideology.
Again, the question was posted before by Tom to which I’ll add. What is my ideology?
Your ideology is different than Tom Cooper's. It's like the mindset of a little kid who still believes in pink ponies. But it seems to me that Ukrainians in general had the behavior of small children until 2022. For example, they believed that joining the EU would save them, yet they couldn't deal with oligarchs and giant corruption in their daily lives for 30 years. In general, I have a lot of sympathy for them. Many of them have been here for decades working on construction sites for a miserable wage. Sad. But now they have a new slapper (Russia) to blame for all their past failures.
You are living under a complete illusion of how the real world works. Crimea will never be conquered by Ukraine. And if it threatens to, there will be a nuclear holocaust. Crimea has always been Russian. Khrushchev gave it to Ukraine in 1951. But the population remained there.
Military Summary YouTube channel is terrible, I used to go there last year when I needed something to laugh at as whoever was running it was basically taking the Russian MoD statements at face value. History Legends and Weeb Union are probably better English speaking pro-Kremlin daily update channels as they likely get their information from Russian telegram channels and not the Russian MoD. Maybe Defence Politics Asia too though I struggled to understand the guys accent when I watched his videos last year.
On the other side a Ukrainian leaning anti-bullshitium daily update channel is Military and History run by a German guy called Torsten, yes he's biased towards Ukraine but he at least only talks about he can actually confirm with visual evidence, he will mention rumours but if he hasn't seen evidence of whatever it is that is claimed he will say that as well.
For big picture stuff Perun is one of the best channels on YouTube. It's a military-economics channel, the guy running it works for the Australian Department of Defence but the channel is not connected to the Australian government, so while most of the videos (hour long PowerPoint presentations, if you've been to university his videos feel like a university lecture) are on Ukraine and Russia he branches out and does videos on the militarys of other nations like Germany, France, China, and South Korea. He's also biased towards Ukraine, he openly admits that in one of his early videos so he's not pretending to be neutral while promoting one side, but he also has an hour long video on what the Russian military is good at and he usually stresses the point that they are still a dangerous opponent despite their failings.
Also you won't find any truly neutral or non-biased analysis channels, they are all run by humans and so are subject to human failings and biases. Best you can do is find channels that have minimum levels of copium, hopium, and bullshitium.
Actually it's Military & History not Military and History, though it will probably come up in a YouTube search if you go looking for it. The profile picture is one of those WW1 era German spiky helmets (pickelhaube)
jj I groped around for a while, but finally found it before you posted (@militaryandhistory).
Thank you very much for the interesting sources. I'll start watching. Finally someone with a factual post without ideology. What a refresher. Truth is, I've been following the Military Summary one for a relatively short time, and I didn't find some of the stuff in there very interesting. By the way, do you know the channel "Reporting from Ukraine"? That strikes me as strongly pro-Ukrainian.
"Unfortunately for the Russians......"
Yeah I've watched Reporting from Ukraine. I stopped after noticing he had a habit of predicting major gains from small advances which didn't come true, or if they did were much slower than he predicted so they didn't have a major effect on the situation in that particular sector. I'm pro-Ukraine so while I think his heart is on the right place his videos had far too much hopium for me to consider him a reputable source.
Thanks Tom, your assessment is the missing piece of the puzzle that none of the warmappers can bring to the table.
Would it be fair to say that Robotyne is the most difficult yet highest-value target for the ZSU at the moment? Looking at the maps with fortifications it would seem as the hardest to be assaulted to date, incl. batches and lines of trees that seem to be precious to RU defenses. Yet, if Robotyne was taken it could also provide the most options to ZSU? It would be the closest point to to the main fortification line of the South, also the closest to Tokmak, but ZSU could also choose to move westward toward the Dnipro to clear more maneuver area and keep their options more open.
Evidence for 'Ukraine lost territory in Kharkiv'?
Comrade Konashenkov! Please re-login.
Yes.
....though where it's 'easy' to make it the 'most problematic' - by pitting an entire Russian combined arms army, entrenched behind a deep belt of mines vs. 2, now 3 ZSU brigades...
The obvious move is for Ukraine to take Tokmak and then Militopol or perhaps Berdyansk and cut the Russian land bridge to Crimea. Russia knows this and is doing everything to prevent it. From the Russian perspective Robotyne is about preventing Ukraine from getting to Tokmak. Sort of like Gettysburg - a place without much instrinsic strategic value, Robotyne might just turn out to be the place where the Russian and Ukranian armies fight it out.
Tom, thanks! As always, excellent and comprehensive analysis of the situation! Thanks again!
Thank you for this report. According to last information which I’ve seen in DeepState VSRF didn’t capture Novoegorivka but has a lot of artillery in that place and push new and new forces on the bridgehead from Karmazinivka. Now ZSU using reserves and heavy shell pontoons across the river in order to cut off supply.
Can you explain what value has Robotyne for VSRF and ZSU: what is possible to happen, when ZSU will capture it?
In last package Germany sent 10 laser illuminators for last version of Vulcan guided shell. Can it be used for destroying of moving targets or just stationary?
And also have you seen last article of Wall Street Journal that West knew that they didn’t get enough weapon and ammunition for succesful contreoffensive and hoped on “battle spirit and bravery”
Re. Novojehorivka: out of curiosity....where do you and where does the DeepState get the info that this....erm.... 'area' is in Russian hands, that they have a pontoon bridge and thus a bridgehead there?
Robotyne per se: has no value. BUT, it's a place 'south' or 'on the other side' of the 10km deep minefield. The area where the ZSU can hope to start conducting manoeuvre warfare.
Laser-guided weapons can be used to target moving targets: just point the laser at the target and keep it pointed at the target.
.....the question is: how 'easy' is to keep the laser marker pointed at the target....
Yes, and no surprise. Just got fed up of commenting such Western idiocies. There are limits of sarcasm....
Thanks
I would argue with you on the importance of Robotyne. The town itself isn't important, but the distance between northern part of Robotyne and southern part of Tokmak is about 27km. If ZSU could occupy Robotyne, they could obliterate the railways in Tokmak with regular tube arty. If they could somehow take out the Kerch railway bridge, they could make the supplying of Russian forces west of Tokmak really difficult. (See how Russia struggled with supplying its forces attacking Kyiv back in 2022).
That's looking that way - in peacetime.
We're in the middle of a war in which Robotyne is a heavily mined place in a heavily mined part of Ukraine. As such, it's of no use for anybody else but for Russian attempts to make Ukrainian effort to liberate it too costly.
And even if Robotyne would be completely liberated within the next 5 minutes, it's going to take 10 years to de-mine it safely enough for civilians to return.
Meanwhile, it's going to take at least 2 weeks to de-mine enough space to drive that artillery that could reach Tokmak into Robotyne, by when the place is going to be demolished to such a degree - and that by both the Russian and Ukrainian artillery - that there's going to be no cover for that artillery left.
Should there be any doubts: check the situation inside Staromaiorske and Urozhaine...
As you said earlier: war is about adaptation. You can adapt to the lack of cover, for example you know where the rails are, you can bring in some arty at night, shot a few rounds to known coordinates and pull those guns back immediately. You don't need to shot exact targets (ie trucks, trains, etc.) You just need to target a larger railway junction and that's it.
This could be efficient enough and fairly safe. Russian night vision capabilities aren't the best. This is how ZSU operated its HIMARSes earlier. Of course Russia can find a way to adapt to this, but then you just need to come up with some new idea.
Thanks Tom I really enjoyed this report the UAF is exacting a toll on the Rats and contrary to MSM saying the counteroffensive is finished, they are making good progress while not advancing at great speed they are taking out the Russians all the time
Thank you for another update, Tom. It gives some positive vision of situation, while numerous Telegram channels are not so much promising nova day. God bless ZSU.
Thank you for your update Tom.
One question remains to me which I guess is hard to estimate: If Ukrainians are killing thousands of troops, is that more than Putin can secretly mobilise in the same period of time or is it more/less?
Putin is not 'secretly' mobilising: he's publicly declared the mobilisation. The problem is that the VSRF can't accept all the mobiks it would like to have. It only has a capacity to accept, equip, organise and train around 15,000-20,000 a month. So, as long as ZSU is shooting away more than that - whether dead, wounded, missing or whatever - the 'plot' is working...
Thank you for your answer.
As far as I got it, what got publicly got announced is that the partial mobilisation is over since i think February or so. Not that I believe a word that they are saying and from my experience Russians are anyway bound in their actions to what they articulate to you anyway.
Hence, your capacity argument is the most logical conclusion. Let's hope the Ukrainians are not running out of ammo.
Sadly, in regards of ammo, the ZSU is meanwhile almost entirely - and thus hopelessly - overdependent on the West. And the West is more depending on its hopes about Ukrainian spirits and the will to fight, than on rapidly expanding own production capacities.....
....would be too expensive, or whatever...
There will be plenty of ammo produced in... 2025. Not great but also late.
Regarding mobilization. Putler started it by signing an executive order. When was asked to sign another order to stop mobilization he said he had consulted with "jurists" and new order is not needed. Mobilization is over he said. But now there are court decisions that exactly says - mobilization is not over , so ru soldiers could not break their contracts (which will be in force till the end of mobilization)
I wonder if part of the reason for the attacks on Odessa are that the ethnic Russians haven't risen up to support him, and therefore aren't real Russians. Not that I disagree that there is a strong element of appearing strong, or just lashing out where he can
Sure, a 'little bit of revenge' is included....
But entire idea of "ethnical russians" or "russia speaking" should support russia is illusion.
How can a big country has completelly fake assumption, which is easy to check by running a survey or research?.
If France invades Switzerland, Sahara states, Canada or Belgium, noone expect franco-speaking people to rebell against own goverment and support France.
Its stupid to think that if a guy speak polish, german russian - he will support russia or poland.
I am not defending the assumption, just that it has been part of their own crazy talking points and PRBS. "Ukraine is Russia." Even now they claim everyone really supports being taken over by Russia. They even "voted" for it.
When they lost battle of Kyiv in March, I read myself in some russian propogandist ( maybe Soloviov ) said: "it's because Ukrainians are actually russians, that's why they fight so good, just like russians"
By that argument, how did Russians loose to Ukrainians?
Because little russia alone fights against entire NATO.
But some episodes are just coincidence, like a sailor smoked next to arsenal of Moskva cruiser and then bad weather.
But it's clearly not because russians fight bad
There have been so many assumptions, it’s hard to keep up.
Argument 1.They started the war because people of Donbas asked them for help, and how could any Russian say no when another Russian asks them for help.
Debunk 1. There are Russians in FL that are asking to be part of Russia. Russian response? None.
Argument 2. Denazification and demilitarization of Ukraine. There are Nazis in Ukraine and they’re ready to attack mother Russia.
Debunk 2. There are more Nazi groups in Russia than in Ukraine.
Argument 3. They stopped water to Crimea.
Debunk 3. Let’s say you own a house and somebody breaks in to it. They say now part of the house is theirs. Now do you provide utilities to that part of the house? I don’t think so.
Argument 4. Dumbing of Bombass. The Ukrainians are bombing innocent people of Donbas.
Debunk 4. Propaganda. An English crew did a documentary. Every time somebody on Donetsk TV said that a person has been killed by Ukrainian bombing. The crew would go to the site and try to find any evidence. There was no bodies in the morgue, no blowout scars, no nobody knew anything about 9it. People on the scene said the same thing. It didn’t happen here.
Thanks for the update, Tom. Any I sight on the latest media focus near the Poland border with Lithuania? There seems seems to be some saver rattling about ‘closing the gap‘
Thanks,
Just Putin & Co KG GesmbH AG PRBS.... not worth paying attention.
The purpose of that "Wagners want to invade..." - is to people talk about it, instead of focusing on something else...
Hitler lost the Battle of Britain when he switched from targeting airfields to city centers.
Will russia stop attacking at some point?
When it runs out of troops, again, then yes. Just like the last summer.
So its probably better for ukraine to provoke them attack at some point and let them run out of troops.
The only problem is if they loose troops at the pace of replacement. For instance 1000 a day
So, what did I describe in the feature we're discussing here?
....and have you got evidence for Ukraine losing '1000 a day'?
I believe he wrote that Russian losses of 1000 a day equal to their rate of training mobiks.
I mean, Russia looses 1000 a day, not Ukraine.
And they replace it with cannon fodder at 1000 a day. So they are stable system.
But we hope that more weapons or decrease in russian training will make them loose more then they can replace
Interesting deepstate are reporting some RF gains in Kupians direction. There are also reports that Vesele was taken by the RF and that they kicked VSU from Staromayorsk. Let`s hope your report are correct and RF is taking much more loses then VSU, so that could lead latter to some real gains.
Evidence for anything of that?
(BTW: you're still owing me answers to your last questions. if you do not start responding, I'll start considering your posts here for trolling. And trolling me leads to a ban. Your choice.)
What question you are talking about ? If you mean about the Wagner incident is because people were posting this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V22Cwgc1_co and I still don`t see any explanation why RF will lie that they lost special IL plane and not old transport, even posting the necrology of the deceased crew members. The Deepstate map changes I saw from here https://t.me/stranaua/115481 . The other info I saw in some pro-Russian channels, it supposed to be internal and proves are not provided. Is it true or not I can’t tell, fog of war is working as expected this time, which is showing both sides are getting better at hiding critical information.
Then go on reading 'some pro-Russian channels'. Or Brazilian channels, or Pudding-fans in Austria: there are enough of them.
Why wasting my time - especially where you so obviously have no evidence in support of your wishful thinking?
I check other sources before i believe RF sources and even then not on 100%.
https://t.me/petrenko_IHS/2452
https://t.me/petrenko_IHS/2461
BTW i read you because you give different and fresh view on the lot of the situations, which i have not seen anywhere else.
Great read as always. Your last sentence sums it up perfectly. The failure of the Ukrainian offensive is not a good omen for the future. Yes, I consider this offensive a failure, even if in technical terms it is still unresolved and ongoing. We are at plan C, D, E of the ZSU? Almost 2 months of fighting to achieve what exactly? It seems that the ZSU has received everything to conduct an offensive (except the airforce), that it is incapable of conducting, while not receiving enough for attrition warfare that it knows how to fight.
It doesn't matter how much VSRF cannon fodder dies because with the current trends, it will take another 10 years to make a remotely noticeable dent given the Russian population. Since the first general mobilisation a year ago, the VSRF commanders have made a systemic decision to forego any offensive capability and instead focus purely on preserving their elite core. Whatever was left of veteran units, are always staying behind. Only fresh conscripts are sent to the front, resulting in massive casualties on paper, but actually few casualties from the point of view of the VSRF. The absolute peak of this system were Wagner convicts, but the same model has been used all across the VSRF. Therefore, what the ZSU are doing is ineffective, inefficient, pointless and leads to nowhere. Until the ZSU starts destroying entire armies and the veteran core of brigades, divisions etc., nothing will change.
Russia cannot win this militarily, but it can prevent the loss of already occupied territory. Basing the entire strategy on Russia imploding economically and/or politically, is a really bad way of conducting a war.
Whatever stays behind is being hit by missiles
No it does not, if that was the case then the front would've collapsed many weeks ago. The amount of resources to sustain tens of thousands of soldiers in combat is well known and not a secret. The ZSU are not even remotely close to repeating the carnage at the rear of VSRF when the first HIMARS arrived.
You say "Whatever was left of veteran units, are always staying behind."
However, the "behind" bases are blasted on weekly basis. Together with the units that populate them.
Moreover, would you please provide the reason for keeping experienced units out of combat for months while losing armor and howitzers because they are assigned to novices?
As far as I have learnt so far, the reason is the self-preservation among the VSRF commanders and veterans with influence. I doubt this was an official order from Gerasimov. It is a result of the Russian sick, barbaric mentality. It seems that e.g. a company was reduced from 100 to 20 people and is now being constantly replenished with mobiks & reservists. Those 20 people are senior and combat experienced so are in command. Therefore, they only send those fresh 80 recruits, squander them, get new ones, squander them and so on, while doing everything so that they themselves avoid being at risk. Wagner convicts were a perfect example of this system.
The VSRF are losing relatively few armoured vehicles these days, with the emphasis on relatively. Howitzers is a different story because the artillery is specialist and should always be at the rear. They are not losing artillery because of mobiks, or at least not directly. The ZSU counter-battery fire has massively improved and that is a fantastic development.
This is not really the case. That is, throughout the war RuFOR has relied on poorly-organized spoiling attacks anywhere they could to pin UFOR. The problem is, most RuFOR losses, including in materiel, occur in these ill-conceived and wasteful assaults.
Going by Oryx/Warspotting, armored losses would be 1:1 over the past two months if considering only the southern theater. During the winter offensive period, mid-January to mid-March, they were more like 5:1 in UFOR's favor. But because of the ongoing Russian counteroffensive in Kharkiv and Donetsk, globally those losses are 1.5:1 in UFOR's favor. Which is to say, 2: to 3:1 losses in favor of UFOR where RuFOR is attacking.
To a *certain* extent your description of mobik-heavy units is correct, but it is not correct that the VSRF has systematically spared its elite core. The relatively-recent formalization (the innovation began last summer) of "storm companies" (task forces) relies on experienced and picked infantry, Spetsnaz are regularly used as first-line tactical reserve and as an auxiliary to VSRF attacks, and up-to-date equipment such as T-72B3, T-90M, and BMP-3 are routinely lost in these sorties.
Even in the case of Wagner, according to Prigozhin - though we may expect some PR exaggeration in this regard - the ratio of KIA was the same among professionals as it was among convicts.
I've said since a full year ago that Putin would do best to fully commit to a defensive strategy. rather than doubling down on institutional core incompetencies. It would be one thing if in theory they had assembled serious offensive plans, for example to punch through the static Zaporizhzhia front to a sufficient extent to place a Ukrainian southern offensive out of contemplation. Or maybe a reverse-Kharkiv this summer given how deprioritized by UFOR the theater is, to secure the strategic river boundary and redirect the surplus to the south. But we can see that Putin/GSRU are a mixture of unwilling, and perceiving of the VSRF as incapable. Yet their perfunctory tactical pressure is literally their primary source of disadvantageous attrition in all essential categories.
I broadly agree but I do not think you are actually replying to what I said. Making generalisations is always limited, so we must remember that there is a lot of variety. Firstly, I am talking about 2023, kherson liberated, general mobilisation called in Russia. One thing is how different units are used, 1st line, reserve etc., and a whole other thing is what happens inside these units. These are not mutually exclusive. I said elite, veteran core of a unit, not elite units e.g. spetsnaz. Two different things. It is clear that there is a veteran and command core in each unit that lives despite said unit suffering crushing casualties. Otherwise many VSRF units wouldn't exist anymore. That is not the case. They exist and are constantly replenished with conscripts. The casualties in the veteran soldiers are being minimised when possible, instead sending poorly trained freshly mobilised to bear the brunt of casualties.
This does not mean, that those that survived the initial phase of the invasion no longer die. It doesn't mean that elite units don't suffer casualties. However, there are numerous sources on both sides that corroborate that the mobiks are disproportionately at risk and not just because they themselves are poorly trained. One common tactic, in particular at bakhmut but not only there, was recon by fire, send mobiks or convicts to find out where the ZSU are and then either assault with veterans or call artillery.
As far as equipment loss ratios are concerned. Again, that is not what I meant. Ratio may be the same but the overall amount of equipment is different (smaller iirc) and the type of equipment has changed. VSRF losses nowadays are much more artillery heavy, which is great news. There are many reasons for this, primarily less heavy equipment in the VSRF and the focus on artillery duels.
According to Oryx Russia has lost over two thousand tanks, two and a half thousand infantry fighting vehicles and around one thousand armoured fighting vehicles so it is not surprising they are losing fewer when they have fewer to lose.
They *are* losing artillery. This was one of the reasons for the latest conflict amongst their generals where the guy who complained about the lack of counter-battery systems was removed from office.
Russia could not prevent losing the territories it had occupied in the Kiev and Sumy regions. Russia could not prevent losing the territories it had occupied in the Kharkiv region.
Russia could not prevent losing a large part of the territories it had occupied in the Kherson region.
Your argument is nonsense from beginning to end.
What are you really trying to tell us?
I don't like repeating myself but if you ask. That the ZSU must learn how to scale offensive operations. Attrition warfare is not a viable military strategy for a country fighting on its own territory, with a small economy, no industry, no equipment stock and a significantly smaller pool of military personnel.
Russia never occupied Kyiv or Sumy regions. It occupied eastern Kharkiv and that was the one significant offensive success of the ZSU. Also, it was caused by a giant mistake by the VSRF, a mistake they clearly are not planning on repeating. As far as Kherson is concerned, once the VSRF offensive on the north bank of Dnipro was stopped, that area ultimately became undefendable, but they still resisted for months and withdrew in good order.
VSRF can prevent the loss of territory and it has been doing it for almost a year now. Have you noticed? You believe in what feels good to you. At the moment the ZSU is hoping that Russia will implode or that the VSRF will implode or that the West does something. Their entire plan is hoping that somebody or something does their job for them. The VSRF are currently making the most of their bad situation and unfortunately it seems enough for now.
If Russia did not occupy Kyiv region, the Bucha accounts should be all fake.
And they had to announce the general population evacuation from Kherson to use civilians for a human shield to "withdraw in a good order".
While Germany was on offensive taking territory for years in WW2 nobody cried that there was no sense to fight it. And you are panicking after a few months of stalemate.
Wtf? The Russians never stabilised these areas because they were contested. The VSRF were there for about a month. Were unable to create any occupational authority. This is just arguing semantics and is pointless.
I am not panicking as it makes no difference to my life whether Ukraine exists, which doesn't mean I don't have preferences. Do you require for everyone to only praise Ukraine and massage their asses? There has been no progress for a year, that means time-wise most of the war since the full-scale invasion, the ZSU have achieved no forward movement. There are deep structural and organisational problems that remain unresolved. Before Ukrainians complain about the West that owes them nothing, maybe they should sort out their pigsty first. Where is the fight against corruption that is devouring the state and the armed forces?
The lands weren’t occupied, the marauders just wanted to pillage and rape. So it was raids, by an occupying force. The Russians wanted to occupy, they just couldn’t hold on to it. Am I getting your point?
Pretty much yes, they tried but failed to properly occupy those areas. There were active engagements inside the entirety of these regions. Hence, the VSRF never actually fully secured any of these territories.
Man, there are priorities. Survival is always the first priority, health is the second. The corruption can be dealt with after the war as fighting it will require structural changes that may shock many of the country's mechanisms which should be functional to keep fighting now.
Please keep in memory the story of Hitler's collecting resources for WW2. It was the West that allowed him to annex the industrial regions of Czechoslovakia boosting the Nazis' industry and morale. After that stopping them costed millions of lives. Now the West does not want to repeat the history. They push for Putin's defeat for their own safety's sake.
'Russia never occupied.... Sumy region(s)'.... good joke...
They didn't occupy it because they were there for about a month and it was contested. They never created a stable occupational authority there. They never even had control over an area but only over the logistical routes. They didn't even capture Sumy itself. Do you really insist on arguing semantics?
When can an occupation of anybody’s land be called stable? I don’t think Russia still have full control of Donbas region. I mean there are mysterious explosions happening in Donbas and Crimea that nobody can explain.
When you are controlling an area, not just a city, town or road, and you have occupational authorities set up including security services. When you pay actual salaries to civilians. Being within the range of long range missiles is irrelevant and sabotage activities are also irrelevant as they are par for the course of an occupation. People here really love arguing semantics just to be contrarian, acting as if they were stupid. It is clear what I am referring to, call it whatever you feel like. You really don't see any difference between Sumy and Crimea?
LOL!
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that Ukraine has recaptured 50% of the territory that Russia seized.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwj-zs2B_qaAAxVdhP0HHTmgA7AQFnoECA0QAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.reuters.com%2Fworld%2Fblinken-says-ukraine-has-taken-back-50-territory-that-russia-seized-2023-07-23%2F%23%3A~%3Atext%3DWASHINGTON%252C%2520July%252023%2520(Reuters)%2Cfight%2522%2520to%2520win%2520back%2520more.&usg=AOvVaw1NRI86dsuUkn5-Di1sekN2&opi=89978449
You cannot provide a single credible source for your claim "Russia can prevent the loss of already occupied territory"
I considered you a harmless do gooder, but I am now convinced you're an idiot. Education in your country has failed you and produced a person who lacks basic reading comprehension. Show me what territory has been liberated since Kherson a year ago? Better to stay silent and seem stupid, than to open your mouth and clear all the doubt.
You do not have a credible source for your claims about territory, no surprise.
Kherson was retaken on November 11. Please don't hurry.
Some recent anecdotes and my commentary about the ZSU that I found very interesting:
1. A SOF unit lost a commander and had multiple wounded, somewhere on the Southern front. The unit was tasked to mop up a freshly taken fortified position on a hill. Except, the Mech infantry that was supposed to take it, failed and the SOF didn't find out until they found themselves assaulting a significantly larger Russian force, fortified, on a hill. Multiple supporting vehicles destroyed, commander dead, many wounded, barely managed to withdraw. The ZSU must be the richest military on the planet to squander their SOF on assaulting trenches.
2. Rumour is that the NATO training in Eastern Europe (mostly Poland) and Scandinavia (I assume it also includes Finland) is good, but the Western European training is often low quality, rigid and wastes a lot of time, because it is rarely adapted to the different levels of experience of the Ukrainian units that are taking part. However, on the other hand, there are also complaints about the Ukrainian trainees. One case was a Ukrainian unit that was trained using a MILES system. The absolute morons took the batteries out of their vests so that they "win" the training sessions. Those retards are a danger to other ZSU units, let alone themselves, and should frankly either be only working in the deep rear or sent as meat assaults. The absolute worst Ukrainian trainees, are those that have fought for a few weeks, had some basic training years ago (so not that young) and now think they are amazing, know everything better and treat training abroad as if these were holidays. Young, freshly mobilised with no prior military experience are fine, they want to learn, they listen, they put a lot of effort. Yet another data point showing how the ZSU is an army of extremes and two different mentalities.
3. An example that corroborates what Tom has pointed out many times before. The difference between well trained units and numpties is enormous. A National Guard battalion was fighting for 11 months without rotation. Theoretically part of the Slovyansk grouping. However, due to being highly dependable, its elements were thrown to plug gaps wherever things got desperate. In 11 months, they suffered 40% irrecoverable casualties. However, only 22 KIA. The battalion that finally rotated them out, was part of the professional/contract army. That batallion suffered 18 KIA on the first day and lost 2 positions. Within 3 months, they suffered 240 KIA. Conclusions? Including the wounded, the entire unit was basically destroyed twice. Tom wrote in the past about how the 92dn (or 93rd?) Mech managed to hold the entire front north of Bakhmut on its own for months and then everything started collapsing despite multiple brigades replacing them. This is why, war does not tolerate stupid. What is worrying is that there does not seem to be a visible improvement in the quality of training conducted by the ZSU. Same useless instructors, often from the "past", resistant to change, keep on producing badly trained soldiers who are then taught to fight by Darwin. In that sense, the ZSU is very "Russian". The quality of training depends purely on the unit you are assigned to. It can be anything from so useless you are definitely going to die and take all your colleagues with you, to the best in the world. There are no standards across the ZSU.
4. Corruption is back with a vengeance. I was surprised to hear that it ever went away, I guess it was somewhat suppressed until recently. You can pay bribes for everything. Bribe to cross the border with NATO. Bribe to not get mobilised. Bribe to be sent to "better" units. Bribe to get "better" or at least safer positions in the army. Whatever you can imagine, you can probably pay a bribe for it. Plenty of young, healthy men in Ukraine and abroad "waiting" to be called, while the actual units are getting high-quality recruits: middle-aged (or worse), unfit, unhealthy, often alcoholics, usually desperately poor (no money for bribes) and unfortunately also often stupid. Remember Tom's recent post on his Facebook page about 1 officer out of 42 fit for the officer course? What a fantastic way to sabotage not just your own army, but your entire country and nation, that is fighting for survival.
The ZSU must progress to win the war, not regress. “A little Soviet army cannot defeat a big Soviet army”.
“A little Soviet army cannot defeat a big Soviet army” - but it did! Several times already.
Defending against VSRF and beating VSRF may as well be two separate wars.
They were beaten under Kyiv, Chernihiv, Sumy, Kharkiv and Kherson.
Which part of defending vs beating/attacking isn't clear? Also, are you now arguing that Zaluzhny doesn't know what he is talking about as well? Are you just going to be contrarian for the sake of it?
Because those are examples of the Ukrainians winning with their own attacks and maneuvers, not just defending.
The Russian army under Chernihiv was attacked and expelled. Same holds for the northern Kyiv and Zhytomyr regions. Same holds for eastern Kharkiv region. Any questions?
I don't know how to explain this in english any better. What you are referring to is defending against the vsrf offensive. This is completely different from conducting offensives yourself. It is an obvious fact that we are watching unfold in real time ffs. I don't understand why you are struggling to understand this. This isn't complicated. If you still don't understand this after this comment than please stop replying to me.