The Russia vs Ukraine show

[5hout]

The total number received is in the hundreds. Leopard 2S and Challengers have been provided in smaller quanitites. Same with the Abrams that are going there. A lot are Leopard 1s, T-72s, etc.

No one would start a counter offensive against Russia with 50 tanks.

I realize for opsec reasons there isn't a live tracker of tanks actually turned over vs in transit vs promised, but from quite a bit of reading I think the high end limit of delivered and operational Leopard 2s is something like maybe 200, and it sounds a good bit less in terms of "in country and operational". The pipeline seems to be actively flowing though, so it's maybe be a situation where they can sustain these loss levels for months and months as the promised tanks trickle in. Also, there are much larger #s of Leopard 1s in country and operational (in the hundreds) which the media consistently conflates with Leopard 2s.

[quikky]

The total number received is in the hundreds. Leopard 2S and Challengers have been provided in smaller quanitites. Same with the Abrams that are going there. A lot are Leopard 1s, T-72s, etc.

No one would start a counter offensive against Russia with 50 tanks.

I realize for opsec reasons there isn't a live tracker of tanks actually turned over vs in transit vs promised, but from quite a bit of reading I think the high end limit of delivered and operational Leopard 2s is something like maybe 200, and it sounds a good bit less in terms of "in country and operational". The pipeline seems to be actively flowing though, so it's maybe be a situation where they can sustain these loss levels for months and months as the promised tanks trickle in. Also, there are much larger #s of Leopard 1s in country and operational (in the hundreds) which the media consistently conflates with Leopard 2s.

I think they've been pretty smart so far, and I would expect the Ukrainian command to use their limited resources well. They have demonstrated that they are indeed not Russia, and do not just throw everything into the meat grinder and hope for the best.

I would expect them to sustain fairly heavy losses in the offensive, especially without air support right now. The key thing is what they're accomplishing with those losses, and what the Russians are losing. If you lose 100 tanks but you break through the enemy's defenses and they lose 500, it's a good trade off. As to how exactly this will unfold is anyone's guess though.

[aurelius]

I think they've been pretty smart so far, and I would expect the Ukrainian command to use their limited resources well. They have demonstrated that they are indeed not Russia, and do not just throw everything into the meat grinder and hope for the best.

I would expect them to sustain fairly heavy losses in the offensive, especially without air support right now. The key thing is what they're accomplishing with those losses, and what the Russians are losing. If you lose 100 tanks but you break through the enemy's defenses and they lose 500, it's a good trade off. As to how exactly this will unfold is anyone's guess though.

Ukraine has talked up a counter offensive for a long time. Ukraine is probing all along the front which has forced Russia to commit manpower and resources to defend EVERYWHERE versus building up for another offensive. My gut tells me Ukraine is not going to commit their main battle forces this year.

Classic strategy: Ukraine would want to drive right in the middle of the front to Mariupol. Cutting the Russian territory in half and eliminate the land bridge to Crimea. But I think they would need a Russian mistake to make that possible without unacceptable losses.

The potential of a Western equipped Ukraine military has great strategic value the Russians must respect. And the Ukranian military will only become better equipped and trained as the war continues. It would be foolish to blunt that strategic value by wasting the military against a fortified, prepared enemy.

A more conservative approach is to maintain the pressure on the front lines, continue behind the lines attacks on Russian soil, force Russia to defend EVERYWHERE, then let the Russians face another winter with ill-equipped soldiers. The slave drafted soldiers already have low morale. Let them freeze and starve another winter.

Those are my dumbass takes on the situation.

[5hout]

I think they've been pretty smart so far, and I would expect the Ukrainian command to use their limited resources well. They have demonstrated that they are indeed not Russia, and do not just throw everything into the meat grinder and hope for the best.

I would expect them to sustain fairly heavy losses in the offensive, especially without air support right now. The key thing is what they're accomplishing with those losses, and what the Russians are losing. If you lose 100 tanks but you break through the enemy's defenses and they lose 500, it's a good trade off. As to how exactly this will unfold is anyone's guess though.

Certainly, all of what you said I agree with. First order model of "trading space for men/material" + some correction term to handle the need PR victories for maintaining western support. It'll be impossible, absent some Breakout and Pursuit situation, to judge the outcome of the summer offensive until most of the dust has settled and you can see who lost what and traded it for what. My earlier post was pre-coffee shorthand for "they seem to be losing a # of their most modern tanks that requires continuous replacement from Western sources so a protracted stalemate or supply chain disruption would be unfavorable too them." with a side dose of "articles from 6 months ago about how the most modern Leopards/Challengers/Abrams would be invincible" are looking pretty silly (which most everyone here would have laughed at as propaganda, but it's still funny to me).

[mikeylikey]

How many tanks did the Mujahideen have?

[aurelius]

How many tanks did the Mujahideen have?

Best estimate? They had thousands by the end of the conflict. Mostly captured T-55's. Some T-62 and T-72 as well.

*I"m being snarky. I recognize the terrain of Afghanistan and the guerrilla type warfare utilized negated the strengths of a battle tank.

[quikky]

I think they've been pretty smart so far, and I would expect the Ukrainian command to use their limited resources well. They have demonstrated that they are indeed not Russia, and do not just throw everything into the meat grinder and hope for the best.

I would expect them to sustain fairly heavy losses in the offensive, especially without air support right now. The key thing is what they're accomplishing with those losses, and what the Russians are losing. If you lose 100 tanks but you break through the enemy's defenses and they lose 500, it's a good trade off. As to how exactly this will unfold is anyone's guess though.

Ukraine has talked up a counter offensive for a long time. Ukraine is probing all along the front which has forced Russia to commit manpower and resources to defend EVERYWHERE versus building up for another offensive. My gut tells me Ukraine is not going to commit their main battle forces this year.

Classic strategy: Ukraine would want to drive right in the middle of the front to Mariupol. Cutting the Russian territory in half and eliminate the land bridge to Crimea. But I think they would need a Russian mistake to make that possible without unacceptable losses.

The potential of a Western equipped Ukraine military has great strategic value the Russians must respect. And the Ukranian military will only become better equipped and trained as the war continues. It would be foolish to blunt that strategic value by wasting the military against a fortified, prepared enemy.

A more conservative approach is to maintain the pressure on the front lines, continue behind the lines attacks on Russian soil, force Russia to defend EVERYWHERE, then let the Russians face another winter with ill-equipped soldiers. The slave drafted soldiers already have low morale. Let them freeze and starve another winter.

Those are my dumbass takes on the situation.

My understanding is that it is a game of who taps their reserves first. Russia defending everywhere isn't really an issue, in my opinion, because it's a symmetrical situation, i.e. Ukraine is thus attacking everywhere. The important part is that if attacks in a particular area prove to be highly successful, larger reserves get tapped and strike deeper. If you get that part wrong, you can get in trouble, whether you are Russia tapping reserves in the wrong direction of defense, or you are Ukraine tapping reserves in the wrong direction of offense. Right now we are seeing pawns moving on a chess board, and both sides are trying to see when and where to move in the knights and the bishops.

As I mentioned earlier, I don't think Ukraine will tap their reserves unless they really saw an opportunity. If none of the pawn warfare now creates an opportunity, they might become defensive again and wait for air support is my guess.

[quikky]

I think they've been pretty smart so far, and I would expect the Ukrainian command to use their limited resources well. They have demonstrated that they are indeed not Russia, and do not just throw everything into the meat grinder and hope for the best.

I would expect them to sustain fairly heavy losses in the offensive, especially without air support right now. The key thing is what they're accomplishing with those losses, and what the Russians are losing. If you lose 100 tanks but you break through the enemy's defenses and they lose 500, it's a good trade off. As to how exactly this will unfold is anyone's guess though.

Certainly, all of what you said I agree with. First order model of "trading space for men/material" + some correction term to handle the need PR victories for maintaining western support. It'll be impossible, absent some Breakout and Pursuit situation, to judge the outcome of the summer offensive until most of the dust has settled and you can see who lost what and traded it for what. My earlier post was pre-coffee shorthand for "they seem to be losing a # of their most modern tanks that requires continuous replacement from Western sources so a protracted stalemate or supply chain disruption would be unfavorable too them." with a side dose of "articles from 6 months ago about how the most modern Leopards/Challengers/Abrams would be invincible" are looking pretty silly (which most everyone here would have laughed at as propaganda, but it's still funny to me).

I still don't get why the "red lines" took so long to cross for the West. If a lot of the equipment was given to Ukraine 6 months ago, Russia would not be able to dig in as much as they have and not only could the war end sooner, but it would have required less Western aid. Literally everything Ukraine asked for has been given to them, but always after "absolutely not, we cannot cross red lines with Russia... ::many months pass:: Ok, here you go". Same story starting from MLRS, to armored vehicles, to tanks, to Patriot, to longer range missiles, and now to jets. I get the likely desire to produce the frog boiling effect with Putin, but damn, you can boil the frog a little faster.

[aurelius]

I still don't get why the "red lines" took so long to cross for the West. If a lot of the equipment was given to Ukraine 6 months ago, Russia would not be able to dig in as much as they have and not only could the war end sooner, but it would have required less Western aid. Literally everything Ukraine asked for has been given to them, but always after "absolutely not, we cannot cross red lines with Russia... ::many months pass:: Ok, here you go". Same story starting from MLRS, to armored vehicles, to tanks, to Patriot, to longer range missiles, and now to jets. I get the likely desire to produce the frog boiling effect with Putin, but damn, you can boil the frog a little faster.

But how true is this? As you state: the West has essentially given UKR what it wants with few exceptions. The reality is that UKR's military is trained to use Soviet systems. And NATO systems differ even among themselves. What if the US's public reluctance was really a smoke screen while UKR units were brought to the US and trained on the weapons systems? Then the matter of transport. It takes 4 weeks for a transport ship to travel from the US to Europe. Add in a couple of weeks of other logistics and it isn't out of the realm of possibility that a full 2 months will pass between deciding to give UKR a weapons system and them receiving it. Add in training time and you get 4-6 months.

The last thing NATO wants to do is get into a rhetoric war with Putin. Putin essentially HAS to back up any crazy shit that comes out of his mouth at this point.

[quikky]

I still don't get why the "red lines" took so long to cross for the West. If a lot of the equipment was given to Ukraine 6 months ago, Russia would not be able to dig in as much as they have and not only could the war end sooner, but it would have required less Western aid. Literally everything Ukraine asked for has been given to them, but always after "absolutely not, we cannot cross red lines with Russia... ::many months pass:: Ok, here you go". Same story starting from MLRS, to armored vehicles, to tanks, to Patriot, to longer range missiles, and now to jets. I get the likely desire to produce the frog boiling effect with Putin, but damn, you can boil the frog a little faster.

But how true is this? As you state: the West has essentially given UKR what it wants with few exceptions. The reality is that UKR's military is trained to use Soviet systems. And NATO systems differ even among themselves. What if the US's public reluctance was really a smoke screen while UKR units were brought to the US and trained on the weapons systems? Then the matter of transport. It takes 4 weeks for a transport ship to travel from the US to Europe. Add in a couple of weeks of other logistics and it isn't out of the realm of possibility that a full 2 months will pass between deciding to give UKR a weapons system and them receiving it. Add in training time and you get 4-6 months.

The last thing NATO wants to do is get into a rhetoric war with Putin. Putin essentially HAS to back up any crazy shit that comes out of his mouth at this point.

I think it's true in large part because a lot of the red lines have been about things that do not need that much more training. For example, longer range missiles. Ukraine has been using the HIMARS systems for like a year now, and have been asking for the ATACMS missiles for as long. I doubt they learned to use the whole system a year ago, and needed a year plus to learn to launch a longer range munition out of it. They still have not received any of the missiles, but have been using the UK-supplied Storm Shadows, of similar, if not longer, range. Similarly with tanks, they began training only about 6 months ago from what I recall. It's understandable T-72s are not the same as Leopards, but it's not as if a tank crew needed a year to learn a new tank, especially considering a lot of Western weapons are more user friendly and have superior optics and targeting systems. There were even red lines about basic armored vehicles for a long while, if you recall.

It's certainly possible at least some things were a smoke screen, but I think most of it has simply been managing escalation risk too conservatively by increasing weaponry as slowly as possible without Ukraine losing. They want a gradual Russian collapse, not a quick one that is potentially less predictable. I understand that, but I think it does not need to be that conservative/slow.

[mikeylikey]

managing escalation risk too conservatively

[Hardartery]

Well, where's my popcorn?

https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-new ... 6fb2858f4b

[Hiphopapotamus]

Inb4

[quikky]

Inb4

Looks like an accidental falling out of a window to me.

[mbasic]

Inb4

is this before or after Tea time?

[Hiphopapotamus]

No tea for you, blyat..

[Hardartery]

So, Wagner Groups had exited Ukraine and is on the move in Russia. The FSB is calling it a coup attempt. I thought there was a writer's strike?

[mbasic]

Apparently Putin is publicly acknowledging that this happening? Wow. He can't blow this off like in a Russian version of a "mostly peaceful protestors" kinda way?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/20 ... prigozhin/

I would think the Wagner guy is in better mental shape than Putin. He knows he'll die if this doesn't work out. That said, I'm guessing he's got some assurances in advance from Russian military leaders to go ahead with this....

[GlasgowJock]

My money's on some 4D maskirovka chess going on here.

If Prigozhan doesn't succumb to either some dodgy tea or accidental defenestration then him and Putin were in cahoots to flush out Russian officers that weren't fully committed to the cause.

Dispersing ~30k Wagner troops to the dark continent is all part of the ruse undoubtedly.

[mbasic]