Kiev Is Burning

[crazyinsane105]

3 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

News from blogger Polkovnik Shuvalov. His view of what he sees becomes increasingly pessimistic.
Ok, the Russian army will (probably?) not immediately collapse and stop fighting. Slogan: Carry on as before, nobody wants to attract unpleasant attention from the authorities.

'... There are simply no commanders left today who have not 'added color' to their reports at least once. If you have a clear mind, you will simply send all available people forward until you get the desired result.
...
The entire system – from top to bottom – is built on a total lie. The most honest will either be thrown out in the first place, or they will bravely 'ruin' all [soldiers] placed under them.
...
First you kill motivation, then you try to replace it with money. And in the end you have nothing. With such a personnel approach as now, the army will be destroyed at the fastest pace in history. Namely from the inside. And now this staffing problem is everywhere.
...'

'...No one denies that in the army it is always much easier for those who just take it as it is. Well, General Popov acted differently - did you help him much later? Dima Lisitsky is the gold of the Russian officer corps, he tried to do the right thing, he was not afraid to go against the decisions of his superiors. And not only have you forgotten your fate, you also no longer remember your name. ...'

https://t.me/shouvalov/212

General Popov, Kdr 58th Army, was removed from his post after he criticized for the lack of rotation of his troops [1]
OTL Lisitzki, Battalion Commander in the 247th Airborn Regiment, shot himself on March 23 after the Btl he led was able to leave a pocket with great difficulty and suffered heavy losses, but the unsuccessful Regimental Commander was highly honored for it. [2]

The Ukrainians are also facing an issue with leadership in the field, but it’s costing them territory and manpower. For the Russians it costs them manpower but they still are able to get territory. While both sides are definitely losing this fight, at the moment the Russians seem to be losing a little less. 

[Ssnake]

3 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

The entire system – from top to bottom – is built on a total lie.

Not an entirely new observation. To wit,

We know that they are lying, they know that they are lying, they even know that we know they are lying, we also know that they know we know they are lying too, they of course know that we certainly know they know we know they are lying too as well, but they are still lying. In our country, the lie has become not just moral category, but the pillar industry of this country.

[mkenny]

3 minutes ago, Ssnake said:

Not an entirely new observation. To wit,

We know that they are lying, they know that they are lying, they even know that we know they are lying, we also know that they know we know they are lying too, they of course know that we certainly know they know we know they are lying too as well, but they are still lying. In our country, the lie has become not just moral category, but the pillar industry of this country.

you forget the important bit....................and of course we are lying too. Lying just as much as they are.

[Stefan Kotsch]

33 minutes ago, mkenny said:

and of course we are lying too.

People will never be completely honest.

But that wasn't the point here. In a dictatorship, systemic lying is vital for the survival of the individual. That's a different category.

[Roman Alymov]

2 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

People will never be completely honest.

But that wasn't the point here. In a dictatorship, systemic lying is vital for the survival of the individual. That's a different category.

    In fact, in dictatorship systemic lying is deadly (because competitors in bureaucratic game will report it, and the person will leave the game). It is the lyberal systems (like West and, to great extent, modern Russia) where it is possible to lie for decades, spend huge amount of money and lifes, finally fail spectacularly - and be ok after that.

[Stefan Kotsch]

@Roman Alymov You know better. But you're telling us something different.

[mkenny]

13 minutes ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

But that wasn't the point here. In a dictatorship, systemic lying is vital for the survival of the individual. That's a different category.

Obviously you have never looked at the career of Boris Johnson

[Stefan Kotsch]

After all, I lived in a dictatorship myself for 30 years. I know what I'm talking about

[Yama]

2 hours ago, crazyinsane105 said:

The Ukrainians are also facing an issue with leadership in the field, but it’s costing them territory and manpower.

Similar criticism from Ukrainian soldier 'Taras', whom with YLE has had correspondence since beginning of the war:

https://yle.fi/a/74-20101411

Part of the article autotranslated:

Private soldiers paint a dark picture of the Ukrainian army: "When the command is like this, Western weapons don't matter" The Ukrainian soldier accuses his commanders in harsh words.  We asked two Ukrainian experts how bad the situation in the Ukrainian army really is.

- The Russian leadership made a lot of idiotic decisions at the beginning of the war. Now our commanders want to arrest them [in idiocy]. This is how the situation could be characterized. This is what a 34-year-old Ukrainian soldier writes to Yle. He severely criticizes the leadership of the Ukrainian army, and therefore does not appear in the story under his own name. Rating could lead to problems. We use the name Taras for the soldier.

Yle has been in contact with Taras throughout the war. Taras joined the Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces on the first day of the full-scale war with Russia. Now he serves in the battalion, which was attached to the 41st Ukrainian mechanized brigade at the end of June. - When we started as part of a brigade, the brigade commander started giving our battalion almost suicidal missions. Soldiers were sent to attack without the support of artillery, tanks or anything else, says Taras.

The Taras brigade is stationed in the Donetsk region. It has taken part in the battles in the directions of Nju-York and Chasiv Yar, i.e. precisely in those areas where Ukraine has suffered territorial losses recently.

Taras is not the only one who criticizes the brigade's leadership. Taras's commander has also publicly criticized the brigade's leadership on social media in July, and the brigade's tensions became news in the Ukrainian media. The commander blamed the area losses directly on the brigade leadership. According to Taras, as a result of the news, inspection visits have been made to the battalion with the aim of "closing the men's mouths". Spirits are not high among Taras' comrades in arms. - The situation looks very dark, I can say that. The Russians sensed the weakness in the control of our troops and crawled forward constantly.

[crazyinsane105]

26 minutes ago, Yama said:

Similar criticism from Ukrainian soldier 'Taras', whom with YLE has had correspondence since beginning of the war:

https://yle.fi/a/74-20101411

Part of the article autotranslated:

Private soldiers paint a dark picture of the Ukrainian army: "When the command is like this, Western weapons don't matter" The Ukrainian soldier accuses his commanders in harsh words.  We asked two Ukrainian experts how bad the situation in the Ukrainian army really is.

- The Russian leadership made a lot of idiotic decisions at the beginning of the war. Now our commanders want to arrest them [in idiocy]. This is how the situation could be characterized. This is what a 34-year-old Ukrainian soldier writes to Yle. He severely criticizes the leadership of the Ukrainian army, and therefore does not appear in the story under his own name. Rating could lead to problems. We use the name Taras for the soldier.

Yle has been in contact with Taras throughout the war. Taras joined the Ukrainian Territorial Defense Forces on the first day of the full-scale war with Russia. Now he serves in the battalion, which was attached to the 41st Ukrainian mechanized brigade at the end of June. - When we started as part of a brigade, the brigade commander started giving our battalion almost suicidal missions. Soldiers were sent to attack without the support of artillery, tanks or anything else, says Taras.

The Taras brigade is stationed in the Donetsk region. It has taken part in the battles in the directions of Nju-York and Chasiv Yar, i.e. precisely in those areas where Ukraine has suffered territorial losses recently.

Taras is not the only one who criticizes the brigade's leadership. Taras's commander has also publicly criticized the brigade's leadership on social media in July, and the brigade's tensions became news in the Ukrainian media. The commander blamed the area losses directly on the brigade leadership. According to Taras, as a result of the news, inspection visits have been made to the battalion with the aim of "closing the men's mouths". Spirits are not high among Taras' comrades in arms. - The situation looks very dark, I can say that. The Russians sensed the weakness in the control of our troops and crawled forward constantly.

I don’t think the Russians can ‘sense’ weakness. Rather, their EW is able to intercept Ukrainian comms and they can determine from there which brigade or company is being led by an incompetent commander, and focus attacks on that axis. 
 

 

[glenn239]

4 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

I wonder what makes you to select quotes from this TG channel (and rearrange them for some reason) instead of producing entire post:

"Let's start with an attempt to find a positive: the myth about bloodthirsty commanders who allegedly aimlessly throw disposable soldiers at the slaughter of an armada is a myth created primarily by our compassionate seekers of some kind of justice. Naturally, every myth needs a foundation, and therefore, even if only one commander out of twenty treats people in an attack like child soldiers, they will see, remember and discuss him alone, and not all the others. Yes, indeed, the strategy and tactics of the handouts sometimes do not leave us much choice of actions here. At least because positional dead ends are not solved by hitting your head against a concrete wall. And an order, I want to remind you, is always an order. 
There is a problem, it is titanic, but it cannot be reduced to a simple search for the perpetrators: here, they say, we will change these couple of people, and then - how it goes, how it rolls. No one disputes that it is always much easier in the army for those who just take the salute as it is. Well, General Popov acted differently - did you help him much later? Dima Lisitsky is the gold of the Russian officers, he tried to do the right thing, he was not afraid to cross the decision of the officers. And not only have you forgotten about his fate, you no longer remember his name. So who are you after that?
In the same GSH (general headquarter - RA), they rely on data that comes from divisions up the hierarchy. And I'll tell you this: today there are simply no commanders who have not drawn up reports at least once. A crystal honest person will just send all available ones ahead until he comes to a predetermined result. The whole system, from top to bottom, is built on total lies. The most honest ones will either be kicked out at the start, or they will honestly ruin everyone they are given. If you make a hole in the gun barrel, then you can make a new barrel, but you can't plug the hole. 
And now for the worst. New personnel additions. Either this is the hidden wisdom of those who have already conceived "reconciliation" and are trying to bring everyone around to such an understanding ("and whoever is against it will die in the attack"), or this is a disaster. With a grandiose shortage, the only plus remained: there would be fewer insane tasks. When there are individuals in the column by state, but in fact we have a total human illiquid (I'm tactless, get used to it) - this is a disaster. Because tasks are not performed with such material. But with such a staff number, the tasks are cut sky-high - "we gave you <enough> people." And then it is easier and safer for the commander to loose them in an attack than to take other actions that are doomed to failure in advance. And when the "new infantry contingent" is an alloy of enchanting illiquid, diluted by assault specialists of super-valuable (and completely different!) Military specialties are a disaster with a multiplier, or even a degree.
First you kill motivation, then you try to replace motivation with money. And you have nothing at the exit. With such a personnel approach, as it is now, the army is being destroyed at the fastest pace in history. It is from the inside. 
And now such a personnel issue is everywhere. The remnants of the previous sets are dragging on everything. And the number of the contingent with a minus sign is negative for everyone. Everything else is solvable, but the point of disaster is here."

   Nothing new, i have told about that in another thread and was criticized by Glen for it 

If you don't want to be challenged, stop posting nonsense about Putin's policy in Ukraine being to surrender.  I find it absurd, I have no idea why you keep saying it, except that I think you are looking for scapegoats that the war you wanted is not proving as easy as you imagined it would be.

I read this piece you posted above.  It comes across as near to total gibberish.  For instance,

And when the "new infantry contingent" is an alloy of enchanting illiquid, diluted by assault specialists of super-valuable (and completely different!) Military specialties are a disaster with a multiplier, or even a degree.

I think I sort of understand what this hyperbolic word mush is saying?  Assaults are costly.  You know my opinion on that one - they need to increase the robotic elements at the point of attack.  Not general mobilization, not word salads, and sure as hell not to allow a politically ambitious type like Strelkov anywhere near real power.

[KV7]

39 minutes ago, crazyinsane105 said:

I don’t think the Russians can ‘sense’ weakness. Rather, their EW is able to intercept Ukrainian comms and they can determine from there which brigade or company is being led by an incompetent commander, and focus attacks on that axis.

Most competent commanders can form a reasonable picture of the quality and motivation of troops they are facing, even from observation of them doing sundry tasks.  And with UAV everywhere that is going to happen. E.g. they will notice if they routinely mess up troop rotations etc.

[ex2cav]

5 hours ago, Stefan Kotsch said:

After all, I lived in a dictatorship myself for 30 years. I know what I'm talking about

I'll ask, East Germany?

 

[Stefan Kotsch]

That’s right, East Germany.

[Stuart Galbraith]

8 hours ago, mkenny said:

Obviously you have never looked at the career of Boris Johnson

Boris Johnson was an incompetent prick, but he wasnt a dictator. To be a dictator, people have to do what you say. There was plenty of evidence of people inside his own cabinet ignoring him.

Britain has flaws, but its not even close to East Germany yet. Maybe if Farage succeeds in his bid to take over the Conservative party.

[Stuart Galbraith]

8 hours ago, Roman Alymov said:

    In fact, in dictatorship systemic lying is deadly (because competitors in bureaucratic game will report it, and the person will leave the game). It is the lyberal systems (like West and, to great extent, modern Russia) where it is possible to lie for decades, spend huge amount of money and lifes, finally fail spectacularly - and be ok after that.

This is complete nonsense. in Dictatorships, lying is necessary to retain ones place at the table. Look at Saddam Hussein. Two of his Generals went to see him during the Iran/Iraq war. They told him their dispositions would lead to a rout. He thanked them, remade the dispositions, then had them shot for defying him.

That is how dicatorships work. They promote yes men, then fire or kill the competent ones, because they, with their independent thought, are a direct threat to the regime. Thats why Stalin tried to kill Zhukov postwar on horseback in the postwar parade. In war he was necessary, in peace, he was a direct threat to Stalin. He only kept him alive I suspect, because he figured he might actually need him again.

Russia is no liberal system. It took the worst of the old USSR, slapped a Democratic vineer on it, and even the West was stupid enough to buy it. Nobody believes it now.

As for lying, you should take a look at how they are going through Shoigu's defence ministry and busily imprisoning anyone they think to blame for the failure of the special 3 day operation to liberate Kyiv. That is a regime that was built up since 2012, 10 years before the war, that was busily hollowing your country and your military out to invest in Superyachts and dacha's. And predictly, nobody noticed until the war machine started to fall apart in Ukraine. Why didnt they notice? Because everyone was doing it, and who wants to have attention drawn to their own crimes, after pointing out someone elses?

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 hours ago, crazyinsane105 said:

The Ukrainians are also facing an issue with leadership in the field, but it’s costing them territory and manpower. For the Russians it costs them manpower but they still are able to get territory. While both sides are definitely losing this fight, at the moment the Russians seem to be losing a little less. 

I really have to question this interpretation. Gaining a few square kilometres of wrecked villages for horrendous losses in men and equipment is not 'winning'. Its not even losing a little. They are only able to fight like that because they had a large prison population they were content to expend, and large numbers of people living in locations outside the major cities, that nobody would miss. For equipment, they were able to expend large amounts of Soviet era equipment, that they will never be able to replace. That isnt winning. Thats throwing resources at a problem in the hope it eventually goes away. They fought Afghanistan like that.

What nobody has explained to me, what happens when Russia runs out of all its 1950's tanks and apcs and artillery, and have pissed away so much human capital they have to start impressing lots of young people from the cities? Putin calculates that when Trump gets in, the war will come to an end. What if Trump doesnt win? Or what if Trump wins, and turns out to have entirely different strategic interests than Russia expects? And the war rumbles on, and on, and on....

Ukraine is not close to winning this war. But its still a long way from losing it. It still gets influx's of new equipment. Russia does not.And Ukraine It has huge amounts of terrain to exchange for time. To use a football analogy, its one all, they are in extra time, and its the Russian team thats looking distinctly tired.

 

Edited August 2, 2024 by Stuart Galbraith

[Yama]

20 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Claimed first photograph of a Leopard 1 loss. Might have been sitting a while.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/knc9Xzn6ij

Oryx has one 'damaged' entry, which was abandoned on the middle of the field. It's further history is unclear to me: this one is probably different one, at least it's not in the same place.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Id be curious to know how they are being used, they have hardly been seen so far.

[Yama]

Yes very little of them have been seen. I wonder what the condition is, given substantial repairs required. OTOH, Russians have been using plenty of T-55/62. Maybe they're just held back in reserve.

[mandeb48]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I really have to question this interpretation. Gaining a few square kilometres of wrecked villages for horrendous losses in men and equipment is not 'winning'. Its not even losing a little. They are only able to fight like that because they had a large prison population they were content to expend, and large numbers of people living in locations outside the major cities, that nobody would miss. For equipment, they were able to expend large amounts of Soviet era equipment, that they will never be able to replace. That isnt winning. Thats throwing resources at a problem in the hope it eventually goes away. They fought Afghanistan like that.

What nobody has explained to me, what happens when Russia runs out of all its 1950's tanks and apcs and artillery, and have pissed away so much human capital they have to start impressing lots of young people from the cities? Putin calculates that when Trump gets in, the war will come to an end. What if Trump doesnt win? Or what if Trump wins, and turns out to have entirely different strategic interests than Russia expects? And the war rumbles on, and on, and on....

Ukraine is not close to winning this war. But its still a long way from losing it. It still gets influx's of new equipment. Russia does not.And Ukraine It has huge amounts of terrain to exchange for time. To use a football analogy, its one all, they are in extra time, and its the Russian team thats looking distinctly tired.

 

The fallacy of your argument is assuming as true a reality that is not verified by real data. You or anyone else knows the casualties on both sides, nor the military production nor many factors that influence the maintenance of the war effort. You assume that one side bleeds uselessly to capture a couple of towns, do you certainly know how many casualties each side suffers? Of course not, but you constructs a narrative based on your desire.

The only thing that is certainly known is the position of the front in which stagnation spreads with a very slight advance on the Russian side in some areas.

In my humble opinion, Russia is not winning the war by occupying a couple of villages a week, but certainly believing that Ukraine is in a better position is a lot.

[mkenny]

4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I really have to question this interpretation. Gaining a few square kilometres of wrecked villages for horrendous losses in men and equipment is not 'winning'. Its not even losing a little.

 

You have to admire the way the old Cold War Warriors cling to their myths. There is no evidence at all that the Russian losses are horrendous' and that is the fiction  being spread by 'The West' and its client media. 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Its very clear the Ukrainians are taking casualties. But everyone who reads military history knows that forces on the defensive, particularly if they are in good defensive positions, and if they withdraw in good order, generally take fewer casualties than those on the offensive. Its a military truth, based on the maxim you need to out number your enemy something like 3 times, just to displace them.

Now if the Ukrainians were continually getting outflanked and overrun, Id be inclined to accept that the Ukrainians are taking the bulk of the casualties. That this doesnt seem to be happening at any point is the best indication that its not the case. And consdering that defensive technology is now so strong (drones, standoff long range atgm) and the force ratios are so low (The main Russian style offensive seems to be battalion strength at most), Im finding it difficult to believe the idea that the Ukrainians are suddenly on the ropes because the Russians assure us this is the case. They have been promising us this for 2 and a half years.

The fallacy is assuming Russia's assurances that they are winning are true, simply because they are taking terrain. Nazi Germany got right to the gates of Berlin. How much good did it do them?

 

 

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

12 minutes ago, mkenny said:

You have to admire the way the old Cold War Warriors cling to their myths. There is no evidence at all that the Russian losses are horrendous' and that is the fiction  being spread by 'The West' and its client media. 

 

Whereas if the British Army were taking casualties like this, you would be describing them as 'some level and castastrophic'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-army-lost-70k-soldiers-ukraine-war-uk-defense-ministry/

https://index.minfin.com.ua/en/russian-invading/casualties/

They even managed to lose something like 40 percent of the Black sea fleet, to a nation that no longer has a navy of more than zodiac boats. A pretty fucking stunning achievement it has to be said.

[mkenny]

4 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Whereas if the British Army were taking casualties like this, you would be describing them as 'some level and castastrophic'.

https://www.politico.eu/article/russia-army-lost-70k-soldiers-ukraine-war-uk-defense-ministry/

https://index.minfin.com.ua/en/russian-invading/casualties/

 

Gotta love those who, when accused of sourcing from 'western media' keep digging by quote yet more western media!