Russia-Ukraine War - News, Discussions & Updates

[corven]

The destiny of small countries is never determined by themselves.

 

[j_hungary]

People can disagree and we have no idea what the future holds but from the current situation no doubt Russia is loosing, their economy and military is in a mess, Ukraine is fully supported by USA EU S Korea Japan Australia, even if their economy is destroyed, they can build it back up by joining EU but for Russia they will suffer for a long time. Not saying a total collapse is coming but they are certainly weaker, they lost Ukraine, Syria, Armenia, Georgia, everyone is dreaming of joining EU and Nato. Russia biggest failure started when Soviet Union collapsed, and Russia failed to form its own EU or Nato, which would then attract nations to join. People will say BRICS or SCO but it's just a paper grouping. We will only witness Russian comeback when Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia, ex Soviet nations all decide to reject Nato EU and join Russian block but they do not want to, the west has superior technology, economy, military and is getting stronger day by day. Today west is openly supporting Ukraine against Russia but Russia does not dare to arm its ally Iran against the west, same way how Russia could not protect Syria, Iraq, Libya from western invasion. Usa EU Israel Australia S Korea Japan GCC all are best buddies of each other. BRICS and SCO look good on paper but is it too late or can they create a multi polar world order.

The sad truth about this war is, both side is NOT GOING TO LOSE this war, which mean the only way forward is a draw, and the sooner people realise this, the sooner the war will end, but at this point, you have people who still believe Russia will win the war and take Kyiv, oat the same time people still believe Ukraine will expel every Russian in Ukriane, including crimea. BOTH WILL NOT HAPPEN.

The west is not about to go overboard and help Ukriane in a way they will outrightly win this war, this is very clear from the beginning with Biden and now Trump, UK or EU is the same, you can see this by the aid both US and Europe provided in the last 3 years. I have been criticizing the Western Response, they don't care, I think I was talking to you before when I said, the US can do one simple thing to force Russian out, that's by pumping 1 or 2 million more barrel of oil, crashing the oil economy and Russia depends on them (40% of Russian GDP is on oil and gas) but they won't bother to do it, that and the amount of supplies we are giving to Ukraine is laughable, US had 8500 M1 Abrams tanks, 4500 Bradley, 80% of those are sitting in California Desert doing nothing, and we send 31 M1 Abrams and 200 Bradley. Even if the entire Western aid can only make up 3 Armoured Brigade, Ukraine needed 10 to push Russia back, that's NEVER going to happen. That's the same with Artillery, that's the same with fighter jet, and that's the same with Anti-Air and munitions. We aren't giving remotely enough for Ukraine to make a push, we gave them enough to defend their country, which is the reason why they had the worse time during Nov 23 - April 24 when we withhold everything, but since then, Europe did step up, that's why we didn't see any significant loss in April 24 til now, even we goes without any US aid package in between.

Russia is not going to take Ukraine beyond Donbas. Ukraine is a very big country, to threaten kyiv, you need to have troop goes from Northern and Eastern and Southern Ukraine, Russia tried that at the best time when they started the war and fall to pieces. There were NEVER going to be another chance until they rebuilt their military, that's going to take almost a decade now. Russia's inability to take Ukraine at a wholesale rate means they can't outlast their economy; that's the reason why the inflation for them is not going away.

I have said this from the beginning, this war is going to end at a negotiation table, and if Ukraine have an option to join NATO in exchange of the occupied land, they are going to take it. Both side don't want this to happen because both side think they still can win this war. And until both side come to this conclusion, Russia is not going to let Ukraine join NATO, and Ukraine will not give up their land, and the war continue.

As for whether or not SCO or any country can counter the West, the only possible solution is China, Russia is a has been, since losing Syria, and Iran influence, they are now losing Central Asian country support, well, that's a given, because Russia is just about to become a tribute state for China, why would they seek their protection from Russia, they would probably approach China directly. Can China make this into something? Being half Chinese, I would say they are too businessman to exploit the system like that. Because to do that, you will need to come out and start interfere with the world, that mean spending money you don't need to, spending troop you don't actually need to (or in other word, meddling someone's else affair) This is something not in the Chinese to do, which mean they would be passive even if they can build SCO into NATO like organisation, which mean as long as they don't touch Chinese interest, China will not intervene uinlike US or the West that go and stir up trouble.

 

[Viet]

The destiny of small countries is never determined by themselves.

always the case small countries are playball by great powers. much like kindergarten, big guys kick small guys around. just curious, when China will initiate 3 day special mil operations? we want to be prepared, just in case.

 

[corven]

always the case small countries are playball by great powers. much like kindergarten, big guys kick small guys around. just curious, when China will initiate 3 day special mil operations? we want to be prepared, just in case.

What good would it do to attack you? You have a large population and scarce resources. Even if we conquered Vietnam, we would have to feed that large population and raise it to our level. Why did our ancestors abandon the Korean Peninsula? Because it wasn't economically viable. The same reason the Ming Dynasty abandoned Vietnam. Vietnam's natural environment is harsh, disease is rampant, and northerners can't adapt to the climate. Even without you attacking, we'd lose 40% of our population. Logistical supply is difficult.

The above is a joke.

I'm simply stating the harsh reality of the international community. Whether you accept it or not is another matter.

 

[KingQamaR]

All these "career military analysts" not. understanding that positional wars of attrition are not won by territorial gains.

In WW1, the central powers lost the war even though none of their major cities were conquered. Their armies were simply attrited to defeat in positional trench battles until their losses were too much to bear and their backs broke.

And yet all they seem to care about is the map. That's all they talk about, kilometres and cities. I am not pointing any fingers towards anyone on here let me make that very clear from the start. .

Most Western “analysts “ have no clue about this war the sky defence expert drives me insane BS he predicts always gets it wrong.

 

[vizier]

ironic
Putin has no shame at all he pays North koreans to kill his slavic brothers. but the Kim brothers face another war.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Ww2 armor tactics on drone age means suicide. They are learning the hard way with high losses. Manpower-horse cavalry meant nothing for Poland against German tanks in ww2. Manpower means nothing for Russia against Ukranian drone swarms today. Too slow advance to make an impact and we see very high losses from Russian side than Ukranians. Neglection of airforce is another issue and Ukraine is gearing up with F16s(or even older bvr planes are possible) and western awacs support away from Ukraine borders can at least give Ukraine air superiority on closer regions like Kherson or Crimea.

Best move for Russia would be to emulate Ukraine defensive posture with drone squads and defensive lines in controlled territories in Donbass. Make fortifications and tunnels instead of spending all manpower on meat assaults to gain 1 sq kms. prepare defensive lines like Ukraine does on its side of control. Focus more on airforce and make maybe mountain bases for fighter aircraft that can reach Crimea, Kherson for a future beefed up Ukraine airforce. Russian awacs were hunted down with very high costs before they need to find cheaper light weight awacs solutions like E -2 hawkeye as well instead of A 50 which is also hard to protect.

Ceasefire will benefit Russia if Ukraine stops getting more F16s or other fighter jets that can shift balance on Crimea , Nuclear thight checks on Ukraine will stop any bomb production attempt of Ukraine and Russian frozen money returned back will heal significant Russian economic wounds. It wont benefit Putin though on short term because he promised all of Donbass borders as a symbolic victory of smo. But still he can easliy change words and sell these real gains as victory as well better than symbolic victories like Pokrovsk with 50k more losses to drone swarms. He does not have political opponents.

From Ukraine side ceasefire will also be a win. They wont be recognising any territories under Russian control so ceasefire does not mean giving up territories forever for Ukraine. Taking them back is only suspended and most probably after Putin rule is over Russia will aim to make a fresh start with Europe. A new agreement that protects minorities like an improved version of Minsk 2 and no nato membership legal assertion of Ukraine and no military presence in those territories, Ukraine can regain ZP Kherson and even more territories back. No manpower will be lost.

 

[RajaBaja]

Because Ukrainians are realising that the Western engineered Maidan was a fraud. They're realising that the Jew Clown of Kiev is a corrupt fraud. They're realising that hundreds of thousands have died in this unwinnable war. Regular Ukrainians want out. But despicable people like Raptor, Viet etc.... want them to continue fighting for to the last Ukrainian.

Ukranians are not wanting out. They are saying they don't want to lose an inch of their land for a ceasefire with Russia.

The main issue is, I think the West is out of weapons to give to Ukrainians. I know for a fact that US now has enough interceptor missiles to keep it's own military posture around the world.

Israel-Iran and Ukrain-Russia wars have depleted the missile interceptor reserves extremely fast. The production needs a year or so without further disbursement to get to a point to send it to Ukraine and Israel both. But there is no pause in Ukraine war so after a few months, their needs will not be fulfilled by the US for a few months and Europeans don't make massive quantities like the US can. So they are advising Ukranians to agree to a ceasefire. Without AD, Russians will destroy Ukraine within 2-4 weeks and will take more area.

On the Russian side, this war in reality, has broke Russian military as the've lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers. Russia is now a big nuke power. Not a big military. Although they are now producing latest equipment under war emergency and have essentially lost all old equipment in the war, but they can't grow their numbers lost. That's going to keep the Russian military at a diminished power for the next near 10 years and they will be superseded by a few other nations in conventional might by then.

 

[Viet]

Ww2 armor tactics on drone age means suicide. They are learning the hard way with high losses. Manpower-horse cavalry meant nothing for Poland against German tanks in ww2. Manpower means nothing for Russia against Ukranian drone swarms today. Too slow advance to make an impact and we see very high losses from Russian side than Ukranians. Neglection of airforce is another issue and Ukraine is gearing up with F16s(or even older bvr planes are possible) and western awacs support away from Ukraine borders can at least give Ukraine air superiority on closer regions like Kherson or Crimea.

Best move for Russia would be to emulate Ukraine defensive posture with drone squads and defensive lines in controlled territories in Donbass. Make fortifications and tunnels instead of spending all manpower on meat assaults to gain 1 sq kms. prepare defensive lines like Ukraine does on its side of control. Focus more on airforce and make maybe mountain bases for fighter aircraft that can reach Crimea, Kherson for a future beefed up Ukraine airforce. Russian awacs were hunted down with very high costs before they need to find cheaper light weight awacs solutions like E -2 hawkeye as well instead of A 50 which is also hard to protect.

Ceasefire will benefit Russia if Ukraine stops getting more F16s or other fighter jets that can shift balance on Crimea , Nuclear thight checks on Ukraine will stop any bomb production attempt of Ukraine and Russian frozen money returned back will heal significant Russian economic wounds. It wont benefit Putin though on short term because he promised all of Donbass borders as a symbolic victory of smo. But still he can easliy change words and sell these real gains as victory as well better than symbolic victories like Pokrovsk with 50k more losses to drone swarms. He does not have political opponents.

From Ukraine side ceasefire will also be a win. They wont be recognising any territories under Russian control so ceasefire does not mean giving up territories forever for Ukraine. Taking them back is only suspended and most probably after Putin rule is over Russia will aim to make a fresh start with Europe. A new agreement that protects minorities like an improved version of Minsk 2 and no nato membership legal assertion of Ukraine and no military presence in those territories, Ukraine can regain ZP Kherson and even more territories back. No manpower will be lost.

that is a perfect textbook combined arms operation, the video combat with north korean troops.
the only difference is drones instead of aircraft.

no way Ukraine will give any eastern territory to the russians. if doing so Ukraine as state would never survive. that’s hopeless without access to the sea, without natural resources, without natural lands. they would forever rely on foreign aid. as price for ceasefire Putin requests tons of concessions.

Putin’s endgame is he wants a helpless victim he can come to rob, to rape, to kill at any time he wants.

 

[corven]

that is a perfect textbook combined arms operation, the video combat with north korean troops.
the only difference is drones instead of aircraft.

no way Ukraine will give any eastern territory to the russians. if doing so Ukraine as state would never survive. that’s hopeless without access to the sea, without natural resources, without natural lands. they would forever rely on foreign aid. as price for ceasefire Putin requests tons of concessions.

Putin’s endgame is he wants a helpless victim he can come to rob, to rape, to kill at any time he wants.

Trump doesn't think like you do. Sometimes justice isn't always served.

 

[j_hungary]

All these "career military analysts" not. understanding that positional wars of attrition are not won by territorial gains.

In WW1, the central powers lost the war even though none of their major cities were conquered. Their armies were simply attrited to defeat in positional trench battles until their losses were too much to bear and their backs broke.

And yet all they seem to care about is the map. That's all they talk about, kilometres and cities. I am not pointing any fingers towards anyone on here let me make that very clear from the start. .

Most Western “analysts “ have no clue about this war the sky defence expert drives me insane BS he predicts always gets it wrong.

War of Attrition is about force regeneration, it basically means 3 things

1.) How many resources had you lost?
2.) How many resources can you recover?
3,.) How long until your force regeneration is negative

Wars ARE ALWAYS dependent on territorial loss/gain, because that related to everything, in attrition warfare point of view, the less territory you had would result, in lower input of both 2 and 3 above.

Essentially, what you want is to try to recover the loss in an amount of time you can exchange, say if you loss 10,000 soldiers a year in a war, you want to get 10,000 soldiers back in the next year for replacement, but it is almost certainly not going to be the case here, because you need 1/10 of 10,000 soldier to train 10,000 soldier, which mean you are ALWAYS going to be on the negative territories here since soldier don't train themselves. Which mean point 3 is more important than point 2. Territorial gain and loss dictate the tempo of point 3. Because it gives you important time to soften the blow and it also give you time to regernate your force.

In this case, all operations are time sensitive; it's not just territorial gain/loss, but everything, you cannot wait for 10 years or so to take a city, by then whatever strategic or tactical importance would have been gone. That is what military scientists called "Tactical consideration" or "Strategic consideration"

I can write a whole thesis on this if you can understand what that meant.

On another note, it's pointless to use attrition warfare in the war of Ukraine, because yes, Russia is a big country, but Ukraine is not small either, for Attrition Warfare to work, you need to be able to deplete the enemy strength, and you are talking about a country with 130 million vs a country with 45 million, even at 1 : 3 ratio difference, it's going to take a long while to chew thru all the available resource Ukraine can throw at this war. If we can't attrit Vietnam back during the Vietnam war when we are 5 times the size, Russia is not going to attrit Ukraine when it's just 3 times the size. Which render all this are a moot point.

 

[vizier]

that is a perfect textbook combined arms operation, the video combat with north korean troops.
the only difference is drones instead of aircraft.

no way Ukraine will give any eastern territory to the russians. if doing so Ukraine as state would never survive. that’s hopeless without access to the sea, without natural resources, without natural lands. they would forever rely on foreign aid. as price for ceasefire Putin requests tons of concessions.

Putin’s endgame is he wants a helpless victim he can come to rob, to rape, to kill at any time he wants.

Russia-NK uses drones too but they disregard Ukranian drone power which is equal and in some cases better than Russians. Taking out some static bunkers does not guarantee against drone strikes to incoming tanks. Newer Fpvs have 30 km range and fiber optic ones are unjammable. Even if they dont hit directly they can que artillery which are very accurate. Drone guided artillery pinpoint strikes are another problem against these ww2 style armor attacks. They used NK kamikaze drones as ww2 stuka bombers so their tactics are not much different than ww2. Maybe they had some ew equipment attached but it is not sufficient by any means.

Ceasefire does not mean giving up territories for Ukraine. Territories can be taken back after Putin rule is over with a new agreement and security guarantees like no nato membership. Also Ukraine is open for ceasefire now Russia backs off from ceasefire wanting more territories before the implementation of ceasefire. Ukraine cannot get their territories back by military means anythime soon. If they bleed Russia enough then there will be openings on Russian defense and Ukraine can gain territories back but it is Ukraine betting on Russian future mistakes. After a while even Russian command will object to unnecessary continious losses threatening their own defensive lines to gain non strategic territories.

 

[Viet]

Trump doesn't think like you do. Sometimes justice isn't always served.

jungle law is the new world justice order.

I don’t know what Trump plans. one possible scenario the US can’t win a war against China and Russia combined, so what he plans is find a way how splitting up the 2 brothers. to get it done Trump is willing to throw Ukraine under the bus. for the US army it’s easier to take one enemy then the other, not simultaneously.

 

[corven]

jungle law is the new world order.

I don’t know what Trump plans. one possible scenario the US can’t win a war against China and Russia combined, so what he plans is find a way how splitting up the 2 brothers. to get it done Trump is willing to throw Ukraine under the bus. fir the US army it’s easier to take one enemy then the other, not simultaneously.

According to German reports, Trump demanded that Ukraine withdraw from two eastern regions. This was the reason Putin agreed to meet with Trump.
Putin informed Xi Jinping of the meeting with Trump on the 8th.

 

[Viet]

According to German reports, Trump demanded that Ukraine withdraw from two eastern regions. This was the reason Putin agreed to meet with Trump.
Putin informed Xi Jinping of the meeting with Trump on the 8th.

possible
but how Trump can do it?
he wants to send an invasion army to Ukraine?
Trump asks Germany, Japan, Korea, and many more to pay more ransom money otherwise he withdraws the US troops.
he is welcome.
nobody will stop him.

 

[corven]

possible
but how Trump can do it?
he wants to send an invasion army to Ukraine?
Trump asks Germany, Japan, Korea, and many more to pay more ransom money otherwise he withdraws the US troops.
he is welcome.
nobody will stop him.

Trump has many options. Ukraine currently has a large number of US military advisors. Simply leaking Ukrainian military deployments to Russia would be enough to bring Ukraine to its knees. Of course, Trump could also withhold intelligence and weapons supplies, while threatening European countries with tariff hikes.