• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

How should west respond to potential (likely) Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Prigozhin says Bakhmut likely to fall soon. Says he’s giving Ukrainians a chance to get out. Ukrainians deny it and are continuing to fight.

They need far more artillery ammunition. Three times as much. I think we should let our stocks get depleted. We don’t need them.
Ukraine could also be bluffing. Maybe they're saying that they'll keep fighting, but are preparing a withdrawal. I hope they have next line of defense prepared in advance because Ukraine can't suffer another loss like Bakhmut in terms of manpower.
How do you know they’ve suffered such a huge loss that they can’t continue? Seriously why do you keep saying crap like this? You know nothing of their casualties or their abilities to regenerate forces and continue the fight.
Neither do you. Ukraine keeps that kind of info to herself.

My impression is based on a gut feeling of what (western and pro-Ukrainian) commentators are saying. It sounds like it's much worse than Kherson or Severodonetsk, for example. And Ukraine has recently had to start forcefully mobilizing people who are not as motivated as before and imposing harsher punishments for desertion, which indicates that either they already have manpower shortage or are expecting to have one soon.

Quit bean counting. Wars are not simply won by the power with the more people. There are a huge number of other factors as Ukraine has demonstrated. Morale is a huge factor.
Indeed. Russia has numbers advantage, but Ukraine has (and I hope it still does) more people who are actually motivated to fight. That's why large number of attrition among those people is so dangerous to Ukraine. They're hard to replace, because even if you can mobilize more, the next batch is invariably going to be less motivated.

Until this year, Ukraine hasn't actually had to force people to the front very strongly. There have been enough volunteers and reservists who've been doing most of the fighting. It's a testament to their will to defend their country, but it's not an inexhaustible resource.

Ukrainians want to fight. Russians are being forced to. And they’re getting slaughtered. Ukraine has far better tactics, command and control, and superior logistics. That’s what wins wars. Not cannon fodder. Ukraine can beat them simply by not losing. Even if they lose Bakhmut, it won’t impact them significantly. US military has been saying for weeks that they can withdraw to better lines anyways. They’ve made Russia pay dearly for nothing but a shell of a town. Ukraine wins because Russia can’t conquer them. Ukraine wins because Russia suffers huge casualties, and loses huge amounts of equipment that they can’t replace. They’ve weakened their defenses elsewhere. Russia loses because its economy continues to be degraded. Russia loses until Putin is dead. And a lot of them know that.
Ukraine doesn't have (massively) superior logistics, in my opinion. It has less need for logistics because it has less of everything, and also because they have better quality equipment. If they're twice as accurate, they only need move half as many shells as Russia for the same effect.
Your gut feelings aren’t based on any reality. You’ve been predicting disaster for Ukraine throughout this and it hasn’t happened.

Russia may have more people. But they’re losing them far more. Morale throughout is awful. Commanders are resorting to firing on their subordinates to force them forward. That’s not a good sign. They may very well revolt. Here’s an intercepted phone call of one soldier:

“No one feeds us anything, mum,” he complained. “Our supply is shit, to be honest. We draw water from puddles, then we strain it and drink it.”

Another:

"We are the soldiers of the 1st, 3rd, and 4th Platoons, 254th Regiment, 7th Company, 3rd Battalion. Please help us sort out the situation," the soldiers say. "Our commander gave us an order not to retreat from our positions. But the commander gave us no cover and no support. We had only machine guns, and all the rest of the weapons were damaged."


It isn’t Ukrainian morale that’s collapsed. A defeat in Bakhmut will not make a difference.
 
Reports from the front say Russia is woefully short of trucks. Without adequate supply of trucks, logistic will necessarily suck. Since Ukraine has been very good at destroying munitions depots, such major depots must be far to the rear out of artillery range. Meaning more trucks are needed. Shortage of trucks means transporting munitions or food and water. There don't seem to be enough trucks for both. Many trucks Russia are using are a variety of civilian trucks of numerous makes and models. Meaning when one of these vehicles has mechanical problems, parts may not be available. It is a military shit show.
 
Prigozhin says Bakhmut likely to fall soon. Says he’s giving Ukrainians a chance to get out. Ukrainians deny it and are continuing to fight.

They need far more artillery ammunition. Three times as much. I think we should let our stocks get depleted. We don’t need them.
Ukraine could also be bluffing. Maybe they're saying that they'll keep fighting, but are preparing a withdrawal. I hope they have next line of defense prepared in advance because Ukraine can't suffer another loss like Bakhmut in terms of manpower.
How do you know they’ve suffered such a huge loss that they can’t continue? Seriously why do you keep saying crap like this? You know nothing of their casualties or their abilities to regenerate forces and continue the fight.
Neither do you. Ukraine keeps that kind of info to herself.

My impression is based on a gut feeling of what (western and pro-Ukrainian) commentators are saying. It sounds like it's much worse than Kherson or Severodonetsk, for example. And Ukraine has recently had to start forcefully mobilizing people who are not as motivated as before and imposing harsher punishments for desertion, which indicates that either they already have manpower shortage or are expecting to have one soon.

Quit bean counting. Wars are not simply won by the power with the more people. There are a huge number of other factors as Ukraine has demonstrated. Morale is a huge factor.
Indeed. Russia has numbers advantage, but Ukraine has (and I hope it still does) more people who are actually motivated to fight. That's why large number of attrition among those people is so dangerous to Ukraine. They're hard to replace, because even if you can mobilize more, the next batch is invariably going to be less motivated.

Until this year, Ukraine hasn't actually had to force people to the front very strongly. There have been enough volunteers and reservists who've been doing most of the fighting. It's a testament to their will to defend their country, but it's not an inexhaustible resource.

Ukrainians want to fight. Russians are being forced to. And they’re getting slaughtered. Ukraine has far better tactics, command and control, and superior logistics. That’s what wins wars. Not cannon fodder. Ukraine can beat them simply by not losing. Even if they lose Bakhmut, it won’t impact them significantly. US military has been saying for weeks that they can withdraw to better lines anyways. They’ve made Russia pay dearly for nothing but a shell of a town. Ukraine wins because Russia can’t conquer them. Ukraine wins because Russia suffers huge casualties, and loses huge amounts of equipment that they can’t replace. They’ve weakened their defenses elsewhere. Russia loses because its economy continues to be degraded. Russia loses until Putin is dead. And a lot of them know that.
Ukraine doesn't have (massively) superior logistics, in my opinion. It has less need for logistics because it has less of everything, and also because they have better quality equipment. If they're twice as accurate, they only need move half as many shells as Russia for the same effect.
Your gut feelings aren’t based on any reality. You’ve been predicting disaster for Ukraine throughout this and it hasn’t happened.
I've been predicting a stalemate, and that the war ends when both sides realize it. And stalemate is exactly what's happening. But there are some dark clouds in the horizon for Ukraine. Rumors of significant casualties in Bakhmut is just one of them.

Russia may have more people. But they’re losing them far more. Morale throughout is awful. Commanders are resorting to firing on their subordinates to force them forward. That’s not a good sign. They may very well revolt.
Wishful thinking.

Russia has the numbers, and it forces people to fight at gunpoint. it's no match 1-on-1 against a well-motivated enemy, but it's nothing to scoff at either. Russia can withstand much higher numerical casualties, because it uses lower-quality troops as cannon fodder and can replace them with equally low-quality troops fairly easily.

If Ukraine's most motivated and valuable people are being decimated by these brute force tactics, it spells doom for Ukraine's ability to continue the fight in the long term.

It isn’t Ukrainian morale that’s collapsed. A defeat in Bakhmut will not make a difference.
Russian morale was always in the crapper.
 
Shitbags like Russian Hitler do not run out of money. They have billions to ante up, and will, precisely so they do not fall out of a window.

Of course, if you start asking your lieutenants to start paying for the war it changes the dynamic because now their support isn't being bought. Instead it's costing them their stolen wealth and things get touchy. At the very least there will be a lot more accidents involving windows.
 
EU threatens China with sanctions, if the latter provides weapons to Russia:


I hope China takes this seriously, though it might be a bluff. I don't think there's anything we can do to stop China from giving Russia components and some special equipment like drones under the table, but it'd be a win if China doesn't start delivering shells or missiles for example.

Never thought I'd see Russia having shortage (and not just lack of ability to deliver them to the front lines) of artillery shells during the war, but it seems to be happening, and ramping up production doesn't appear to be possible very quickly. But China also uses soviet-compatible shells as far as I know and could easily help Russia regain that advantage.
 
Top Putin ally Ramzan Kadyrov 'seriously ill from suspected poisoning'

Several opposition sources have claimed kidney illness accounted for Kadyrov’s surprising absence from Putin’s state of the nation speech on 12 February, and a recent ‘bloated’ appearance, as seen at a recent meeting in his palace in Chechen capital Grozny with Denis Pushilin, head of the invaded Donetsk People’s Republic.

The Chechen’s leader’s luxury private jet was known to have made several trips recently to the UAE, and he has been less visible than usual in recent weeks.

While Kadyrov, 46, is one of Putin’s closest allies, the Chechen strongman – reportedly a father of 14 with three current wives – has strongly attacked the running of the war, especially by the Russian defence ministry and certain generals.

Let's hope this is true and that Putin is next in the land of political poisonings.
 
Top Putin ally Ramzan Kadyrov 'seriously ill from suspected poisoning'

Several opposition sources have claimed kidney illness accounted for Kadyrov’s surprising absence from Putin’s state of the nation speech on 12 February, and a recent ‘bloated’ appearance, as seen at a recent meeting in his palace in Chechen capital Grozny with Denis Pushilin, head of the invaded Donetsk People’s Republic.

The Chechen’s leader’s luxury private jet was known to have made several trips recently to the UAE, and he has been less visible than usual in recent weeks.

While Kadyrov, 46, is one of Putin’s closest allies, the Chechen strongman – reportedly a father of 14 with three current wives – has strongly attacked the running of the war, especially by the Russian defence ministry and certain generals.

Let's hope this is true and that Putin is next in the land of political poisonings.

There's a Cleveland Clinic there in Abu Dhabi. I don't think that particular doctor is associated with it but it would be interesting what backlash the CC might see should they preserve the life of such reprehensible people.
 
Your gut feelings aren’t based on any reality. You’ve been predicting disaster for Ukraine throughout this and it hasn’t happened.
I have to say that I have appreciated Jayjay’s perspective. Yes it is consistently pessimistic for Ukraine, but he adds his reasons why he thinks so, and it is a useful counter to the consistently optimistic view that the USA predictably offers (likely to keep us willing to fund.). Both perspectives make sense when I consider the sources and the motivations, an are valuable to have both, allowing better speculation about additional perspectives.

Just as I appreciate barbos’ perspective to learn what partisans in Russia are being told, for the record. We may personally conclude that he is repeating misinformation that Russia is advancing, but it is very interesting to hear what that is.

JayJay’s perspective comes from a country that has decades of experience dealing with Russian aggression in various ways, and is not colored by the same propaganda that envelop us as Americans. NO one on this thread has been consistently accurate in predicting, so the varied viewpoints are extremely valuable, IMHO, to coloring in the actual picture of reality in Ukraine.

Sometimes I read Jay’s posts and feel, “come on man, give them some credit!” but I’m also thinking at the same time, “okay, you have a point with that, let’s see where that thought leads.”

(and I have completely avoided any jokes about Finland’s reputation for having a sunnily optimistic outlook about life…) (oops.)
 
I do wonder a lot about this, though. In Bakhmut, the fact that it has been meter by meter combat for many months means that we know exactly where the Russians and the Wagner group are. What is it that is preventing the Ukrainians from blanket bombing Russian/Wagner positions? (I know there’s an answer, not questioning their competence, I’m wondering what all the factors are)



From the March 4th USW report:
(There’s ore detail there for those who are not already following)
Russian forces appear to have secured a sufficient positional advantage to conduct a turning movement against certain parts of Bakhmut but have not yet forced Ukrainian forces to withdraw and will likely not be able to encircle the city soon. Russian forces made one limited confirmed advance near Bakhmut on March 4.[1] As ISW reported on March 3, Ukrainian forces are likely setting conditions for a controlled fighting withdrawal out of particularly difficult sectors of eastern Bakhmut, although it is not clear that Ukrainian commanders have decided to withdraw at this time.[2] Russian sources claim that Wagner Group elements have made gains in northeastern and eastern Bakhmut over the past few days, creating a tactically challenging turning movement in urban areas in northern Bakhmut.[3] Ukrainian officials have recently reiterated that Ukrainian forces still control the situation in Bakhmut but have noted that circumstances are increasingly complicated and that the Wagner Group has committed its most advanced and prepared elements to assault operations in the area.[4]

(Underlined emphasis mine)

I’m curious if there is a set of weapons or trainings that would allow Ukraine to exploit that location knowledge and strike a morale blow by a big campaign that affects large numbers of Russian troops.


Thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Another interesting bit from he March 4 report:

The “what could possibly go wrong with that?” Feature of the day…. It reveals a lot about both finances and the relationship with the oligarchs to have the Defense committee suggest that corporations should have their own military defense systems.

Russian State Duma Defense Committee Head Andrey Kartapalov stated that Russian companies should purchase their own air defense systems to defend against drones. A Russian state-owned news source reported that Kartapalov claimed on March 1 that Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) resources are focused on protecting critical state and military facilities. He argued that every “self-respecting corporation” should be able to purchase and install such systems for themselves.[11] This bizarre proposal would likely create further security issues for Russia, not resolve them, as the prospect of numerous companies fielding and presumably using their own air defense systems independent of the Russian military should alarm any sane Russian official. Kartapalov’s statements are almost certainly an extension of the domestic panic inflamed by reports of the March 2 incursion into Bryansk Oblast and accusations of recent Ukrainian drones in Russian airspace. Kartapalov may have additionally hoped to place the onus of defense on individual enterprises to frame Ukrainian activity as a direct threat to domestic Russian affairs.
 
I do wonder a lot about this, though. In Bakhmut, the fact that it has been meter by meter combat for many months means that we know exactly where the Russians and the Wagner group are. What is it that is preventing the Ukrainians from blanket bombing Russian/Wagner positions? (I know there’s an answer, not questioning their competence, I’m wondering what all the factors are)



From the March 4th USW report:
(There’s ore detail there for those who are not already following)
Russian forces appear to have secured a sufficient positional advantage to conduct a turning movement against certain parts of Bakhmut but have not yet forced Ukrainian forces to withdraw and will likely not be able to encircle the city soon. Russian forces made one limited confirmed advance near Bakhmut on March 4.[1] As ISW reported on March 3, Ukrainian forces are likely setting conditions for a controlled fighting withdrawal out of particularly difficult sectors of eastern Bakhmut, although it is not clear that Ukrainian commanders have decided to withdraw at this time.[2] Russian sources claim that Wagner Group elements have made gains in northeastern and eastern Bakhmut over the past few days, creating a tactically challenging turning movement in urban areas in northern Bakhmut.[3] Ukrainian officials have recently reiterated that Ukrainian forces still control the situation in Bakhmut but have noted that circumstances are increasingly complicated and that the Wagner Group has committed its most advanced and prepared elements to assault operations in the area.[4]

(Underlined emphasis mine)

I’m curious if there is a set of weapons or trainings that would allow Ukraine to exploit that location knowledge and strike a morale blow by a big campaign that affects large numbers of Russian troops.


Thoughts?
Simple: lack of ammunition. We’ve struggled to produce and send Ukraine sufficient ammunition for artillery for the entire war. They throw 1/3 of the shells that Russia throws.

In WWII it wasn’t uncommon to throw tens of thousands of shells at a single position. When the US 36th Division tried to cross the Rapido in January 44, their artillery fired 1,000 rounds per minute. Mortar crews, tanks and fighter bombers added to this. This went on for 1/2 hour before the infantry went in. And it still didn’t work.

Ukraine is firing less than 10,000 a day, on all fronts. And western factories are struggling to keep up with the demand. Ukraine isn’t likely to get significant ammunition supplies for years! Instead the focus has been on training them to fight with less ammunition.
 
Prigozhin rants about lack of shells and political meddling against Wagner:


I think Wagner isn't near falling back and the fearmongering is just his way of upping the stakes in the dispute against Shoigu's faction. But the very last sentence is most telling: He seems to admit that the reason why Wagner stopped recruiting from prisons is an order from Kremlin. Not that it wasn't effective.

Wagner is currently the only part of Russian offensive that's doing moderately well. That's probably the only reason they still keep Prigozhin around.
 
Today's artillery and artillery of WW2 are different beasties. With modern electronics, artillery shells can be programmed to hit with accuracy of 1 meter. Thermobaric warheads can destroy otherwise impregnable bunkers and fortifications. He who has the most modern artillery with smart munitions capabilities has a great advantage.
 
Today's artillery and artillery of WW2 are different beasties. With modern electronics, artillery shells can be programmed to hit with accuracy of 1 meter. Thermobaric warheads can destroy otherwise impregnable bunkers and fortifications. He who has the most modern artillery with smart munitions capabilities has a great advantage.
Yes. Very true. 155mm is a lot more artillery than an 88. I wasn’t implying Ukraine needs to fire 1000 rounds a minute. Although if they could this war might be going very differently.

True story, I once found a WWII artillery round on a beach in North Africa. The shell was all rusty but the warhead was perfect. I picked it up thinking my dad would be real happy. His eyes got huge. He’d just started a roaring campfire. He took it and buried it somewhere deep.
 
I do wonder a lot about this, though. In Bakhmut, the fact that it has been meter by meter combat for many months means that we know exactly where the Russians and the Wagner group are. What is it that is preventing the Ukrainians from blanket bombing Russian/Wagner positions? (I know there’s an answer, not questioning their competence, I’m wondering what all the factors are)



From the March 4th USW report:
(There’s ore detail there for those who are not already following)
Russian forces appear to have secured a sufficient positional advantage to conduct a turning movement against certain parts of Bakhmut but have not yet forced Ukrainian forces to withdraw and will likely not be able to encircle the city soon. Russian forces made one limited confirmed advance near Bakhmut on March 4.[1] As ISW reported on March 3, Ukrainian forces are likely setting conditions for a controlled fighting withdrawal out of particularly difficult sectors of eastern Bakhmut, although it is not clear that Ukrainian commanders have decided to withdraw at this time.[2] Russian sources claim that Wagner Group elements have made gains in northeastern and eastern Bakhmut over the past few days, creating a tactically challenging turning movement in urban areas in northern Bakhmut.[3] Ukrainian officials have recently reiterated that Ukrainian forces still control the situation in Bakhmut but have noted that circumstances are increasingly complicated and that the Wagner Group has committed its most advanced and prepared elements to assault operations in the area.[4]

(Underlined emphasis mine)

I’m curious if there is a set of weapons or trainings that would allow Ukraine to exploit that location knowledge and strike a morale blow by a big campaign that affects large numbers of Russian troops.


Thoughts?
Simple: lack of ammunition. We’ve struggled to produce and send Ukraine sufficient ammunition for artillery for the entire war. They throw 1/3 of the shells that Russia throws.

In WWII it wasn’t uncommon to throw tens of thousands of shells at a single position. When the US 36th Division tried to cross the Rapido in January 44, their artillery fired 1,000 rounds per minute. Mortar crews, tanks and fighter bombers added to this. This went on for 1/2 hour before the infantry went in. And it still didn’t work.

Ukraine is firing less than 10,000 a day, on all fronts. And western factories are struggling to keep up with the demand. Ukraine isn’t likely to get significant ammunition supplies for years! Instead the focus has been on training them to fight with less ammunition.
In WWI, bombardments were even larger than in WWII, and just as ineffective. Prior to the Battle of the Somme, British artillery fired one and a half million shells, over four days. Thirty thousand shells over half an hour looks like a drop in the bucket by comparison.

The fact is that over the last century, artillery doctrine (as with the doctrines of all military systems) has gone from quantity to quality. A huge, area wide bombardment, over days rather than hours, is just not as effective as a short, targeted attack on specific enemy positions and strongpoints.

In a large barrage, most of your ammunition is wasted turning over rubble; And the longer it lasts, the more time it gives the enemy to anticipate and prepare for an assault in the area.

If you can develop tactics and procedures that double the effectiveness of your weapons system, you can achieve the same effect with only half as much ammunition, saving not only the ammunition itself, but also the entire logistics train that supports your batteries, freeing up transportation resources for other, more tactically valuable, materiel.

A massive reduction in the scale of artillery bombardments over time is an inevitable outcome of improved technology, both in terms of the guns and shells themselves, and of the targeting and target identification and designation systems. If you know where the target is, can destroy the target in one hit, and can hit it with one shot, you don't need to fire thousands of shells at it over several days in the hope that several will score hits and that this will be adequate to destroy it.

Training them to fight with less ammunition is exactly the kind of assistance that makes a significant, long term, impact. Just sending more ammunition is a short term boost, and may be even more effective in the immediate term, but in the long run it's far less valuable.

Of course, if we want them to win, we should be doing both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SLD
I do wonder a lot about this, though. In Bakhmut, the fact that it has been meter by meter combat for many months means that we know exactly where the Russians and the Wagner group are. What is it that is preventing the Ukrainians from blanket bombing Russian/Wagner positions? (I know there’s an answer, not questioning their competence, I’m wondering what all the factors are)



From the March 4th USW report:
(There’s ore detail there for those who are not already following)
Russian forces appear to have secured a sufficient positional advantage to conduct a turning movement against certain parts of Bakhmut but have not yet forced Ukrainian forces to withdraw and will likely not be able to encircle the city soon. Russian forces made one limited confirmed advance near Bakhmut on March 4.[1] As ISW reported on March 3, Ukrainian forces are likely setting conditions for a controlled fighting withdrawal out of particularly difficult sectors of eastern Bakhmut, although it is not clear that Ukrainian commanders have decided to withdraw at this time.[2] Russian sources claim that Wagner Group elements have made gains in northeastern and eastern Bakhmut over the past few days, creating a tactically challenging turning movement in urban areas in northern Bakhmut.[3] Ukrainian officials have recently reiterated that Ukrainian forces still control the situation in Bakhmut but have noted that circumstances are increasingly complicated and that the Wagner Group has committed its most advanced and prepared elements to assault operations in the area.[4]

(Underlined emphasis mine)

I’m curious if there is a set of weapons or trainings that would allow Ukraine to exploit that location knowledge and strike a morale blow by a big campaign that affects large numbers of Russian troops.


Thoughts?
Simple: lack of ammunition. We’ve struggled to produce and send Ukraine sufficient ammunition for artillery for the entire war. They throw 1/3 of the shells that Russia throws.

In WWII it wasn’t uncommon to throw tens of thousands of shells at a single position. When the US 36th Division tried to cross the Rapido in January 44, their artillery fired 1,000 rounds per minute. Mortar crews, tanks and fighter bombers added to this. This went on for 1/2 hour before the infantry went in. And it still didn’t work.

Ukraine is firing less than 10,000 a day, on all fronts. And western factories are struggling to keep up with the demand. Ukraine isn’t likely to get significant ammunition supplies for years! Instead the focus has been on training them to fight with less ammunition.
In WWI, bombardments were even larger than in WWII, and just as ineffective. Prior to the Battle of the Somme, British artillery fired one and a half million shells, over four days. Thirty thousand shells over half an hour looks like a drop in the bucket by comparison.

The fact is that over the last century, artillery doctrine (as with the doctrines of all military systems) has gone from quantity to quality. A huge, area wide bombardment, over days rather than hours, is just not as effective as a short, targeted attack on specific enemy positions and strongpoints.

In a large barrage, most of your ammunition is wasted turning over rubble; And the longer it lasts, the more time it gives the enemy to anticipate and prepare for an assault in the area.

If you can develop tactics and procedures that double the effectiveness of your weapons system, you can achieve the same effect with only half as much ammunition, saving not only the ammunition itself, but also the entire logistics train that supports your batteries, freeing up transportation resources for other, more tactically valuable, materiel.

A massive reduction in the scale of artillery bombardments over time is an inevitable outcome of improved technology, both in terms of the guns and shells themselves, and of the targeting and target identification and designation systems. If you know where the target is, can destroy the target in one hit, and can hit it with one shot, you don't need to fire thousands of shells at it over several days in the hope that several will score hits and that this will be adequate to destroy it.
I agree. But a mass artillery fire can also impact the invaders morale. I’ve seen a few videos where I thought a good 10 round salvo would be perfect. They’d fall back quick. Or otherwise be dead.

I would like to see Ukraine be firing up to 25,000 rounds a day across all fronts. But concentrated in the strong spots they need. I that’s 750,000 a month. A huge order.
 
Back
Top Bottom