I've really enjoyed the series of assessments by Colonel Markus Reisner on YouTube.
Probably a bit dry for the casual viewer, but his professional explanation of the summer offensive. I think it provides an objective summary of the action.
Colonel Reisner confirms that Ukrainian officials have stated that the offensive failed to meet its objectives after more than 190 days of operations.
This is not good, but it should not be seen as an excuse for the West to stop supporting Ukraine. To do so would be to encourage further Russian belligerence.
Very, very disappointing. ((((
ReplyDeleteIf that is the level of war science on the West...
Like... there was 10(TEN) kilometers of minefields.
And that is ONLY on the FIRST line and in between first and second.
And that is visible from satelite images... even on Google Maps.
But that "highly educated" military "genius"... showing on his childish pictures that there was only 100-200 meters of minefields???
WTF????
Noisy anon.
Second part is BS too.
ReplyDeleteGLSDBs not delivered? Though russia military report shutting em down... and some big explosions happen out of 80 km range of HIMARS?
Not enough platforms of SU-24 to launch missiles???
That military dunno, if there is not enough of something -- that only mean MORE intensive use...
That looks like try to exculpate NOT ENOUGH number of that missiles given.
"Not enough training" for 9(NINE) brigades???
Please, Oh mighty and wise Western military "genius" go say -- HOW MANY tanks and bradlies would be needed to fill that nine brigades... by NATO standards? And how many was delivered???
HINT. Number, that was NOT ENOUGH to replenish IMMEDIATE loses EVEN.
PS Just compare number of promiced/delivered armored things... to number used in Desert Storm in 1991.
Even without ALL other booming things.
That "Washington wanted assault in April"...
ReplyDeleteThat is political deceptive talks.
MUST BE read as "we want to use you miserly reserves in brainless chicken assaults... so you'd loose, and be more ready to give up and start negotiation with Putin... on his terms, of course"
PLUS "It would free as from need to send even that miserly numbers of Western armored booming things... so we'd be able to spare ourself from that nasty political involvement -- our lies that we ready to support Ukraine in everything, and till Victory"
Well...
ReplyDeleteIdea that attack at ONE point ONLY -- is that ALSO epitome of Wisdom of Western war science TOO???????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Especially if that point is -- MOST OBVIOUS. And one where preparations of enemy was the most hardcore...
What that "changes in control" childish drawing is about???
ReplyDeleteDo that military "genius" even know what terrain traits mean in combat??? How open fields differ from tight urban regions. And forest from riverbanks????
And that... that russia gaines was at cost of 100.000 "chmobiks" -- treated as cannon fodder thrown into fight before more capable and guarding em from fleeing, basicly destined to die.
ReplyDeleteWhile virtually unlimited munition, air support and assaulting through territory of peaceful towns.
While ukrainian troops was doing it against MOST prepared field lines. Against enemy which have unlimited ammo, air support and nearly unlimited reserves...
With only limited munition, NO air support and non-existant reserves...
Using WW2 operation as example...
ReplyDeleteit's beyond being LAME.
It is PITIFUL.
Given AMOUNT of difference in warfare and tactics changes happen since then.
Not "Desert Storm"??? Really???
THREE armored division...
ReplyDeleteAnd 9... barely eligible to be called armored infantry brigades...
Oh... and that BS "we do not need to underestimate enemy".
ReplyDeleteNO... you need to give ENOUGH weapon.
Well... at least he was able to state properly -- how even MINISCULE delievery of REAL weapon... can sway it into direction of Victory.
ReplyDeleteAnd on the bright side (for Putin):
ReplyDeleteRevealed that West/NATO have capabilities to trace all incoming into Ukraine air space. So they can compare with their records for a chance to find a blind spot.
Revealed that West not only ready... but ALREADY drained blood of war from Ukraine -- munition and weapon delivery.
And now ready even to completely STOP it.
And as a sweet candy -- "generous" proposal to fight with infantry ALONE... while russia with help of China will be only INCREASING production of high tech weaponry... and combat-test it on Ukrainians.
To grow into enemy worthy of fight by NATO, or what???
What ELSE bright goal of such a "wise" strategy there could be, otherwise?
I feel for the plight of the Ukrainian people, and agree that the West needs to do its part.
ReplyDeleteBut, WW2 started with Russia and Germany invading Poland. No one wants to start WW3 by responding to Russia's invasion of Ukraine by an overt NATO response.
So it sucks to be an Ukrainian stuck in the meat grinder, but things could be so much worse. If for no other reason that even tactical nukes are as large as the bombs dropped on Japan.
No one wants Ukraine bombed with nukes.
\\No one wants Ukraine bombed with nukes.
DeleteI tried to analyze possible scenarios of using nukes. And found that there either nor favorable ones, or chances already lost.
Let's start from most horrible one -- carpet-bombing with nukes. Radioactive Desert scenario.
It maybe possible... well, maybe, as nobody knows how much nukes RFia have still able to go boom.
It will just render vast swatches of territory into useless or even dangerous swamp. And that just behind own windows -- that is, cannot be anything but shutting own leg.
Then... scenario with bombing some industrial and transportation centers -- even with it not punished. That will open can of worms... for RFia first of all.
Because if RFia CAN throw nukes such indiscriminately -- how it can protest against, protect itself from nukes being thrown at them???
Especially such a precedent dangerous to China. Because elimination of dozen of coastal cities... and they are doomed.
So... only use of tactical weapon to make breaches into ukrainian defense lines is on the table... as only realistic.
But, it have low chances too... as for that Putin would need to have such army -- that would be ready to attack while going IN DIRECTION of radioactive mushroom. And not fleeing from it.
Yeah. They able to send many people as cannon fodder, while holding guard squads behind their backs.
But even that guards will flee away from it. :-)))
So. Only possible, and dangerous scenario was -- Symbolic Nuking. With pointing finger at what USA did.
And screaming "we was forced to do that".
But.
All chances for that -- are in the Past as for today.
There was attacks at Crimea. At RFia's soil. At center of Moscow EVEN.
So. Now. Putin just CANNOT throw nuke. Even smallest one. Under pretense that it was somehow justified.
And especially after that as NATO found counter-measure to ANY such attempt. YEAR ago already -- made it clear to Putin, that EVEN if smallest amount of radiation... no matter from what: nukes, accidents on nuclear plants, some dirty bomb or any other sneaky attempt -- it would be "attack on NATO, under 5th article".
And. Miracle happen. EVEN verbal threats of radioactive incident... ceased to exist. Exactly for more then a YEAR already. ;-)
PS Well, you are free to criticize my thought here. What if they are over-optimistic...
\\but things could be so much worse
ReplyDeleteThings... WILL become much worse, if Ukraine will be thrown under the bus.
But... it seems West higherups not only groked, made themself at peace with that thought... but even started to convey that truth to the public... lately. Well, just recently. Like yesterday.
Only, it would need some time, now. After so many years lost. :-(
For that thought to gain momentum.
As Churchill have said: "Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else"
Anonymous: You've had your say, and the points are concerning. I can do nothing to help you deal with your frustration, and posting here will not resolve your anger.
DeleteEnough is enough. Any further comments will be deleted.
Sorry.
DeleteI thought that giving my moniker was enough.
And we gained enough mutual understanding (from our talks year ago... or that was two already). So I could count on that my words will not be seen as personal attack.
Because they isn't. Just open-minding sharing a thought. About damn horrible matters, yes. But... if it CANNOT be open-minded and frank conversation about damn horrible matters...
I think you've taken my comment poorly, which is probably my fault. I haven't taken any of your comments as a personal attack.
DeleteHowever, I have to ask how many more posts you need to make to say what you want to say? Given the limitations of this platform it is understandable you need more than one.
But, after 14 posts, if you haven't managed to say what you need to say, then this blog is not the right platform for continuing the discussion.
That's all. Nothing more than that.
I was writing that comments... while watching that video.
DeleteI that is so despicable thing to do?
If so... you have my greatest appreciation... for opening to me this hidden secret...
PS Do you need to conceal your feeling that much? To devise such an ad hok explanations?
PPS Whatever you might think of this conversation. It might be worthy of reminder.
That I am foreigner. English is not my native lang. As well as subtle cultural rules of communication of Albion.
To make it even worse, I am not versed in courtesy talks too. Techy, nerdy frankness talker.
So. Whatever harm you might find was hidden in my words -- it was accidental. And not intended.
Just open-minded and cheerful (even if it was around such tough topics) talk.
But other then that... it's all up to you to decide, anyway.
Have a nice day!
There's no need to make excuses for your contributions. Yes, you lack certain skills; we all do.
DeleteIf it had been me, I would have taken notes as I watched the video, then written one comment (that may have needed to be spread across several comments because blogger has a limit on the number of characters per comment).
As it was, what you posted was a splurge of rambling comments.
Nothing wrong in that per se. But, if you want to learn to communicate in English, then hopefully my comments here and above will help you to reach that goal.
Thank you for you suggestions. And for attenuating your initial response (outrage?)...
DeleteWell, If I would be that novice in it. I could take it as granted. But I have some experience behind my belt today. And it makes me aware that that is far not stylistic matters that prevent (mutual?)understanding.
What is? I still don't know. As for that I would need at least one non-militant agreement achieved. Which not happened even once, yet. :-(((
As for the style I used... well, it played up to its purpose -- it made you respond, maybe even more honest then you'd like... because it was my honest feelings. And immediate assessment of said facts.
Faithfully yours, noisy anon. ;-)
\\If it had been me, I would have taken notes as I watched the video, then written one comment
DeleteThat was spontaneous... and I never thought that I could be THAT disappointed... :-(((