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

[SLD]

ISW reporting that they were repulsed. But probably a very fluid situation.

My Monday morning quarterback view is that Ukraine is spreading itself too thin. They need to focus their strengths in one area primarily. They need to stick to offensive operations in Zaporizhia. Drive a wedge between them.

 

[bilby]

ISW reporting that they were repulsed. But probably a very fluid situation.

My Monday morning quarterback view is that Ukraine is spreading itself too thin. They need to focus their strengths in one area primarily. They need to stick to offensive operations in Zaporizhia. Drive a wedge between them.

I disagree; I think what they're doing is the right approach - by attacking everywhere, they prevent Russia from reinforcing against their main thrust - or even from identifying it. And indeed, they keep open the possibility that if they have unexpected success anywhere, they can turn that feint into a full on attack.

Russia has a lot of manpower, but very little of it is of top quality, and by threatening at various points, Ukraine can keep the best Russian troops scurrying from hotspot to hotspot, wearing themselves out and forcing them to keep fighting in unfamiliar territory. As soon as they get established in one part of the front, they're needed elsewhere.

They don't really need to drive to the Azov coast; Once they have sufficient long enough range artillery, they can severely disrupt Russias ground lines of communication between Russia and Crimea, without necessarily putting boots on the ground.

It's all about logistics; Ukraine is forcing Russia to move a lot of men and materiel back and forth along the line, in increasingly difficult circumstances.

Circumstances that will become even more difficult as the weather deteriorates. This is a good time of year to keep your own troops and supplies (as far as possible) in one place, while at the same time pushing your enemy into moving around a lot.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I disagree; I think what they're doing is the right approach - by attacking everywhere, they prevent Russia from reinforcing against their main thrust - or even from identifying it. And indeed, they keep open the possibility that if they have unexpected success anywhere, they can turn that feint into a full on attack.

Russia has a lot of manpower, but very little of it is of top quality, and by threatening at various points, Ukraine can keep the best Russian troops scurrying from hotspot to hotspot, wearing themselves out and forcing them to keep fighting in unfamiliar territory. As soon as they get established in one part of the front, they're needed elsewhere.

Second this.

Ukraine doesn't want a focal point for Russia to counter. They want to stretch Russia's deployments until it snaps somewhere. It's not about territory, it's about snapping the line.

They don't really need to drive to the Azov coast; Once they have sufficient long enough range artillery, they can severely disrupt Russias ground lines of communication between Russia and Crimea, without necessarily putting boots on the ground.

It's all about logistics; Ukraine is forcing Russia to move a lot of men and materiel back and forth along the line, in increasingly difficult circumstances.

Circumstances that will become even more difficult as the weather deteriorates. This is a good time of year to keep your own troops and supplies (as far as possible) in one place, while at the same time pushing your enemy into moving around a lot.

This whole war has been about logistics. They keep hammering the Russian logistics, it gets harder and harder for them to maintain the battle front.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I disagree; I think what they're doing is the right approach - by attacking everywhere, they prevent Russia from reinforcing against their main thrust - or even from identifying it. And indeed, they keep open the possibility that if they have unexpected success anywhere, they can turn that feint into a full on attack.

Russia has a lot of manpower, but very little of it is of top quality, and by threatening at various points, Ukraine can keep the best Russian troops scurrying from hotspot to hotspot, wearing themselves out and forcing them to keep fighting in unfamiliar territory. As soon as they get established in one part of the front, they're needed elsewhere.

Second this.

Ukraine doesn't want a focal point for Russia to counter. They want to stretch Russia's deployments until it snaps somewhere. It's not about territory, it's about snapping the line.

They don't really need to drive to the Azov coast; Once they have sufficient long enough range artillery, they can severely disrupt Russias ground lines of communication between Russia and Crimea, without necessarily putting boots on the ground.

It's all about logistics; Ukraine is forcing Russia to move a lot of men and materiel back and forth along the line, in increasingly difficult circumstances.

Circumstances that will become even more difficult as the weather deteriorates. This is a good time of year to keep your own troops and supplies (as far as possible) in one place, while at the same time pushing your enemy into moving around a lot.

This whole war has been about logistics. They keep hammering the Russian logistics, it gets harder and harder for them to maintain the battle front.

This is about attrition. Not logistics. Ukraine is trying to hit Russian materiel faster than Russia can replace them. Russia has a limitted amount of money, and is suffering from sanctions.

Russia is trying to wreck everything and anything in Ukraine, especially their economy, in order to force their western allies to keep helping them. For example. Ukraine desperately needs money, and needs to ship their grain out. So they are dumping it into eastern Europe. Which makes them miffed, and withdraw support. That's the Russian tactic. To make it as expensive as possible for the world to keep Ukraine able to fight. It's a battle of economies. Just like WW1 and 2. It's a race to see which side breaks first.

My army friend who is helping training Ukrainian soldiers says that the style of this war took everybody by surprise. Nobody thought we'd ever go back to WW1 style trench warfare. But yet here we are. He's sitting in the Swedish strategic command. So he knows better than most what's going on.

That's why it's a mistake to see the distance of the front being moved as an indicator of how close we are to the end. The front will stay, pretty much, the same until one side collapses completely, and then it'll be over for them.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

That's why it's a mistake to see the distance of the front being moved as an indicator of how close we are to the end. The front will stay, pretty much, the same until one side collapses completely, and then it'll be over for them.

WWI all over again.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Intercepted phone calls from the front purport Russian troops have not been getting food, water, medical supplies, or munitions for two weeks. Casualties are massive, and wounded are not being evacuated. Morale is at rock bottom.

 

[bilby]

That's why it's a mistake to see the distance of the front being moved as an indicator of how close we are to the end. The front will stay, pretty much, the same until one side collapses completely, and then it'll be over for them.

WWI all over again.

I'm unconvinced. I don't think even the Western Front in the Great War was much like this popular sketch of how the war was won.

Logistics was the critical element in the final collapse of static warfare in 1918, which was triggered by German advances against the British and French forces during the Spring Offensive.

Up until that time, Germany was able to keep the front lines supplied, despite bleeding the home front dry of almost everything, because they were able to get what little materiel they had to the places it was needed, using well established lines of communication.

Their success in pushing forward meant adding a considerable obstacle to the last few miles of their logistics train, which now had to cross the badly broken ground on which the Battle of the Somme had been fought two years earlier. They had the supplies at the old front line (food was scarce, but not more so than in the previous year; Ammunition, particularly artillery shells, were available in greater numbers than at any other time in the war), but they simply couldn't get those supplies to the new front, leaving their soldiers stranded.

Attrition reduced morale for ordinary citizens back in Germany, but as supplies for the front were always prioritised, it had far less impact for the men fighting the war than it had on their families back home. And in 1918, supplies for the Western Front, including manpower, were more plentiful than before, as a consequence of the end of fighting in the East.

The German logistics system (particularly the railways) had been designed and built for rapid movement of men and materiel between the French and Russian fronts, so getting those newly available supplies to the (old) Western Front wasn't a problem; But the new front was up to thirty miles further, over ground with no existing roads or railways, and which was criss-crossed with significant obstacles.

Germany was broken in the west by tactical success, which led to logistical failure.

The inspiration for their breakthrough was the fear that US involvement would be decisive in tipping the attritional balance against the Central Powers, and it likely would have been - but it hadn't happened yet.

The success of their breakthrough was due to their having suddenly gained access to vast additional resources from the now defunct Eastern Front.

Attrition might well have beaten Germany, if Germany hadn't beaten themselves by breaking their logistics train. But we will never know for sure, because it was all over before we got a chance to see.

Logistics is everything. Causing general shortages for your enemy can help a little, but in a war, the frontline forces won't be allowed to starve before the civilians back home do. No matter how little there is, it will go to the fighting forces - if you can get it there.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This whole war has been about logistics. They keep hammering the Russian logistics, it gets harder and harder for them to maintain the battle front.

This is about attrition. Not logistics. Ukraine is trying to hit Russian materiel faster than Russia can replace them. Russia has a limitted amount of money, and is suffering from sanctions.

Russia is trying to wreck everything and anything in Ukraine, especially their economy, in order to force their western allies to keep helping them. For example. Ukraine desperately needs money, and needs to ship their grain out. So they are dumping it into eastern Europe. Which makes them miffed, and withdraw support. That's the Russian tactic. To make it as expensive as possible for the world to keep Ukraine able to fight. It's a battle of economies. Just like WW1 and 2. It's a race to see which side breaks first.

My army friend who is helping training Ukrainian soldiers says that the style of this war took everybody by surprise. Nobody thought we'd ever go back to WW1 style trench warfare. But yet here we are. He's sitting in the Swedish strategic command. So he knows better than most what's going on.

That's why it's a mistake to see the distance of the front being moved as an indicator of how close we are to the end. The front will stay, pretty much, the same until one side collapses completely, and then it'll be over for them.

It all reduces down to getting the supplies to the battle. Whether the limit is HIMARS dropping on a supply depot or sanctions keeping them from making stuff in the first place it's still a form of logistics.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Update on Ukraine's ATACMS attack on Berdyansk and Luhansk: British MOD says a total of 14 Russian helicopters were hit, nine in Berdyansk and 5 more at Luhansk. I'm sure there are others that were seriously damaged given this was a cluster munitions strike. Good luck replacing/repairing them.
Is this all the ATACMS Ukraine got from us? I wouldn't think so. But I can't help but think given how suprising this attack was there would have been others in concert. I can't imagine it was for a lack of targets.

Avdiivka: It looks like Russia wasted a hell of a lot of equipment and personnel on this boondoggle of an assault while gaining very little ground of no strategic value. While I keep hearing ratios of three to one on typical Russian to Ukrainian losses, Avdiivka seems to be a standout. The Russians have gone above and beyond and equipment losses look to be greater than five to one.

I'm starting to think Russian senior officers who know how hopeless this all is are doing just enough to keep themselves alive and out of prison. War is often comparred to a chess game but I've heard it said this is one where the west keeps replacing Ukraine's pieces.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

I'm starting to think Russian senior officers who know how hopeless this all is are doing just enough to keep themselves alive and out of prison.

Whether officers or aristocrats this has always been the Russian modus operandi. Until Russia develops a working civil society it's always going to be run like something less than a troop of baboons locked into a pecking order. If they weren't employing blocking troops on the peasants at the front lines the Army would leave their positions in mass. Again, this is the Russian way and always has been.

 

[ZiprHead]

 

[Rhea]

What is the date on that video? What does it show? Is it a tank getting blown up or a more impactful tactical change in the front?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

There are some Internet rumors and tabloid gossip that Putin or possibly one of his many body doubles had suffered a heart attack. Even the tabloids are saying that this story is unconfirmed but then how would they get a Russian to confirm it? I mean, even if they paid them money to lie what person living in Russia right now would risk the wrath? Anyway, it's interesting to think about a possible assassination attempt of a war criminal to end this dumb war. Someone somewhere probably really is working on it.

 

[Harry Bosch]

There are some Internet rumors and tabloid gossip that Putin or possibly one of his many body doubles had suffered a heart attack. Even the tabloids are saying that this story is unconfirmed but then how would they get a Russian to confirm it? I mean, even if they paid them money to lie what person living in Russia right now would risk the wrath? Anyway, it's interesting to think about a possible assassination attempt of a war criminal to end this dumb war. Someone somewhere probably really is working on it.

That would be good news. I don't think that the war will end until after Putler is dead. Having said that, I don't think that any of his successors will be any less imperialist. But it's easier for a successor to abandon a war that dosn't make sense. Not my war...

 

[TV and credit cards]

There are some Internet rumors and tabloid gossip that Putin or possibly one of his many body doubles had suffered a heart attack. Even the tabloids are saying that this story is unconfirmed but then how would they get a Russian to confirm it? I mean, even if they paid them money to lie what person living in Russia right now would risk the wrath? Anyway, it's interesting to think about a possible assassination attempt of a war criminal to end this dumb war. Someone somewhere probably really is working on it.

Perhaps this is why Biden broke off his press conference stating he had to go to the Situation Room. Though at his age, Situation Room could be code for something else.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

He also could have just intended to say it's time for lunch but then gaffed.

Plausible Seniability

 

[Copernicus]

The Kremlin is denying the heart attack rumor, FWIW. It wouldn't be the first time that someone published a false report on Telegram, nor would it be the first time that the Kremlin has lied.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Maybe Ukraine get them sooner than January.
Maybe Ukraine already has them.
Maybe we don't much care any longer if Ukraine hits military targets within Russia.
Maybe they'll be unitary warhead for a single hard target instead of cluster munition.
Should you move valuable assets out of range now, at some later date, or not at all?
Eek!
Don't know whether to shit or go blind, huh?

Ukraine Situation Report: Signs Longer-Range ATACMS Will Be Sent Grow

ATACMS variants with greater reach would give Ukraine a weapon capable of putting nearly any Russian target in Ukrainian territory at risk.

www.thedrive.com

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The Kersh Bridge's days are numbered. Goodbye Kersh Bridge. It was a good old bridge while it lasted.

 

[Patooka]

Maybe we don't much care any longer if Ukraine hits military targets within Russia.

I think the Biden Administration never really gave a fuck if Ukraine hits military or even civilian targets in Russia but still very much gives a fuck if that is done with US kit.