Kiev Is Burning

[Stuart Galbraith]

Just now, Roman Alymov said:

Nice to see you are back to Donkeys, since usually it is indication of NATO proxy force having little success to report.

   By the way since Pokrovsk is mentioned - below is terrain map (Pokrovsk highlited for convenience of international readers not familiar with Russian). Easy to see Pokrovsk is de-facto last relatively high point of Donbass ridge, West of it terrain is going more or less down and flat all the way to Dniper

 

Oh im sorry, I mistakenly thought your army was trying to take the same town for the last 6 months? Perhaps this is a barometer of success I wasnt previously aware of.

This time next week in Kyiv!

[Roman Alymov]

9 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Oh im sorry, I mistakenly thought your army was trying to take the same town for the last 6 months? Perhaps this is a barometer of success I wasnt previously aware of.

This time next week in Kyiv!

Not 6 month but 11 years, since 2014 (Pokrovsk AKA Krasnoarmeysk was the first city of Donbass where referendim for indepencence was completed in May 2014)

Референдум в Красноармейске завершился из-за угрозы жизни избирателям :: Новости дня / ВЗГЛЯД

"May 11, 2014, 18:52 • News of the day
The referendum in Krasnoarmeysk ended due to the threat to the lives of voters
The referendum in Krasnoarmeysk ended due to the threat to life from

Krasnoarmeysk became the first city in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, where voting in the referendum was completed and polling stations were closed, said Roman Lyagin, chairman of the Central Election Commission of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, specifying that the turnout at the polling stations was 77.08%.
According to him, the reason for this decision was the threat to the lives of voters and election commission staff from the so-called National Guard. "The election commission staff managed to evacuate ballot boxes, subscription lists, voter lists and the seal," ITAR-TASS quoted him as saying.

Earlier it became known that armed men seized the building of the City Council in Krasnoarmeysk, Donetsk region, where the territorial election commission for the referendum on the status of the region was working, blocking the voting process.

According to Lyagin, since the beginning of voting, there has been a high turnout in the city and a large percentage of people have managed to vote.

In addition, according to him, information has been received about the possibility of armed provocations in Kurakhovo near Donetsk. The DPR militia was sent to the site to ensure security.According to Lyagin, in the village of Ocheyrekino in the Yasinovatsky district of Donetsk region, armed fighters of the National Guard of Ukraine are also blocking the voting process at the referendum.

A referendum on regional self-determination began in Donetsk and Luhansk regions on Sunday. Polling stations opened on Sunday at 8:00 a.m. local time (9:00 a.m. Moscow time).
As of 16.00 (17.00 Moscow time), 69.21% came to the referendum in the Donetsk region."

    Unfortunatelly back in 2014, when it was possible  to integrate Donbass and most of Ukraine without bloodshed, elites of Russian Federation were focused on saving their London palaces, so Pokrovsk was captured by NATO forces (among many other places). But with help from West, this elites are gradually loosing their influence. Still, it is long process and will take years, i think.

[Roman Alymov]

Advanced recruitment practice in Odessa. This time, future M1 Abrams crew member was too badly ingured so recruiters just left without wasting time on dragging him to minivan 

https://t.me/dva_majors/82827

[JWB]

Russia winning:

 

[mkenny]

 

Russia winning?

Reminds me of the way The US 'won' WW2?

 

Edited November 6 by mkenny

[JWB]

1 minute ago, mkenny said:

Reminds you of the way The US 'won' WW2?

 

Not comparable at all.

[Josh]

Russia is certainly winning and I think it is hard to characterize it as anything else. The most recent victory is probably about the most significant in two years. It probably will not dramatically change the nature of the conflict, regardless of local topography, simply because UAVs do not have a big problem flying uphill. But Russia has certainly been winning on the battle fairly consistently since the Kherson withdrawal, with the temporary exception of Kursk.

How far Russia can go and whether the costs justify the gains is a separate question that is much harder to quantify. I think it possible they could get as far as the Dneiper if they sustain this level of effort for a couple years, but I suspect the war will be ended by other factors off the immediate battlefield before that can be achieved.

[mkenny]

17 minutes ago, JWB said:

7 minutes ago, JWB said:

Not comparable at all.

 

Yes it is you just are too far down the rabbit hole to see it. All side have tactical failures even when they are strategically winning. 

You and the other (dwindling) band of true believers no longer even try and promote the 'Ukraine can win' vision and are now completely focused on 'lets  do as much damage to Russia as we can'  regardless  of how many Ukrainians have to  die doing it.  

 

[mkenny]

2 minutes ago, Josh said:

How far Russia can go and whether the costs justify the gains is a separate question that is much harder to quantify. I think it possible they could get as far as the Dneiper if they sustain this level of effort for a couple years, but I suspect the war will be ended by other factors off the immediate battlefield before that can be achieved.

The most likely end is The Russian reach the Dneiper and The EU rushes into western Ukraine to try and save  Odessa. Then it is a hard choice for the current  EU warmongers. How many of their soldiers lives will  they waste before national populist parties get them out of office. 

Either way Russia is going to annex all the land they occupy and that puts it beyond western reach and under Russia's nuclear umbrella.

[JWB]

32 minutes ago, mkenny said:

Yes it is you just are too far down the rabbit hole to see it. All side have tactical failures even when they are strategically winning. 

You and the other (dwindling) band of true believers no longer even try and promote the 'Ukraine can win' vision and are now completely focused on 'lets  do as much damage to Russia as we can'  regardless  of how many Ukrainians have to  die doing it.  

 

No it is not. The USA was not close to running out of men.  Russia is losing tanks faster than they can produce new and rebuild old.

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2024/11/russias-new-ukraine-problem-running-out-of-tanks/

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, JWB said:

Russia winning:

Is it this place?

[Roman Alymov]

Fruits of "Revolution of dignity"

https://t.me/boris_rozhin/186023

[mkenny]

1 hour ago, JWB said:

No it is not. The USA was not close to running out of men.  Russia is losing tanks faster than they can produce new and rebuild old.

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2024/11/russias-new-ukraine-problem-running-out-of-tanks/

Yep, Russia is running out of :

Tanks,

Convicts,

Men,

Shovels,

Washing machine chips,

Petrol,

yadda,

yadda,

yadda.

 

Dream on sunshine.

 

 

[mkenny]

1 hour ago, JWB said:

No it is not. The USA was not close to running out of men. 

There were serious US  shortages in NWE 1944-45. Shortages of both  (infantry) men and tanks. 

[mandeb48]

14 minutes ago, mkenny said:

Yep, Russia is running out of :

Tanks,

Convicts,

Men,

Shovels,

Washing machine chips,

Petrol,

yadda,

yadda,

yadda.

 

Dream on sunshine.

 

 

Add truck tires. I don't know how the almost bald 2022 tires have held up so far

[Josh]

5 hours ago, mkenny said:

The most likely end is The Russian reach the Dneiper and The EU rushes into western Ukraine to try and save  Odessa. Then it is a hard choice for the current  EU warmongers. How many of their soldiers lives will  they waste before national populist parties get them out of office.

 Like I said, I think that is within Russian capabilities if they can maintain the current operational tempo for the next couple years. However i think Russia’s ability to maintain these losses is far more finite than they are implying. Equipment does not seem to be produced at consumption rates and manpower is currently achieved through large financial payouts. I think it unlikely either of those are maintained through two years. I also think Ukraine’s ability to strike economic targets is only going to spiral upward. So my thought is that conditions off the battlefield will change faster than the front lines and likely have a greater effect on the final outcome.

 

5 hours ago, mkenny said:

Either way Russia is going to annex all the land they occupy and that puts it beyond western reach and under Russia's nuclear umbrella.

No argument there. But it also will inherit a permanently hostile neighbor along over a thousand km of frontier militarily subsidized by a group of nations with twenty times its economic output. NATO could not ask for a better permanent drain on Russian resources. Russia may feel comfortable evacuating every soldier on its borders with NATO but it will never be able to do that along the LOC with Ukraine.

Edited November 6 by Josh

[Stuart Galbraith]

47 minutes ago, mandeb48 said:

Add truck tires. I don't know how the almost bald 2022 tires have held up so far

Donkeys dont seem to have much use for them.

[Sinistar]

if and when the russians essentially shut off ukraine's grain exports moving down the dnieper to the black sea they have nothing and it is basically a failed state

 

then the problem in a post russia - ukraine war is that the west is attempting to go into a competitive race not just against russia but to add china possibly brics india and anyone else we manage to push into that orbit

this is why i can say that i do not believe at all those moves against venezuela is about narco traffickers but the huge oil potential

 

the most advanced economies in "western europe" are mostly de-industrialized and transitioned to green economies or finance and services based economies - and trying to compete with the combined output of china - brics- global south

 

trying to do too much at once and you see the nato and eu leadership talking about how they seem to think they hold the cards 

you see them boasting about taking on these potential conflicts in the future as if they can compete in energy or electronics and mining and minerals production against these states as if they have these things

europe generally does not have the kinds of natural resources that it also depends on sourcing from competitors- they need them but also seem to want to compete with them at the same time

 

you watch how ursula von der leyen and rutte or any of the eu capitals talking this big game that nato is prepared to confront them all (i.e., really the united states if anyone is going to do it) and it looks like they do not seem to understand just how weak the hand they are playing

 

you should really consider that the leaders of these countries understand full well the leverage they have here if it goes into an arms race against them which is really why japan or germany could never win a war of production against the united states in world war 2 but now we seem to think that a similar problem does not appear with larger strategic goals by isolating or pushing these other states into it

 

 

 

Edited November 6 by Sinistar

[mkenny]

24 minutes ago, Josh said:

 But it also will inherit a permanently hostile neighbor along over a thousand km of frontier militarily subsidized by a group of nations with twenty times its economic output. NATO county ask for a better permanent drain on Russian resources. Russia may feel comfortable evacuating every soldier on its borders with NATO but it will never be able to do that along the LOC with Ukraine.

It already had that-in spades. The difference will be that the hostile neighbour is a lot further 'west' than it used to  be. The west is a shrinking economy and BRICs is the future. The EU is never going to be able to afford to carry Ukraine and finance its own welfare system. 

 China is also not going to sit back and allow 'the west' to destroy its unlimited supply of cheap food, fuel and resources. China knows full well that she is next on the USA/EU hit-list and the recent theft of the Chinese Company tells her that they west has no qualms about  stealing all it can from her so there is no chance that China will let Russia go  down, no chance at all.

Edited November 6 by mkenny

[Josh]

2 hours ago, mkenny said:

It already had that-in spades. The difference will be that the hostile neighbour is a lot further 'west' than it used to  be.

The pre 2022 frontier was with the DPR/LPR. Hypothetically there was no active front threat for Russia at all, unless you are implying Russia was supplying troops to that front. But now any shared border with Ukraine must be defended. That is a huge change and I think you know it.

Also now Ukraine can strike a thousand km into Russia routinely.

 

2 hours ago, mkenny said:

The west is a shrinking economy and BRICs is the future. The EU is never going to be able to afford to carry Ukraine and finance its own welfare system.

Ukraine is not at war with BRICS, just R. No one in BRICS is donating anything to Russia. And if European finances look dubious, that is nothing compared to the long term consequences for Russia.

The future is perhaps China; the rest of BRICS is just hoping to follow in their coat tails. The B, R, and S are of little importance. And India probably has a more vested interest in China failing, and hardly is in lock step with Xi.

None of this helps Russia in any way. In fact, it seems possible India might curtail its oil purchases.

 

2 hours ago, mkenny said:

 China is also not going to sit back and allow 'the west' to destroy its unlimited supply of cheap food, fuel and resources. China knows full well that she is next on the USA/EU hit-list and the recent theft of the Chinese Company tells her that they west has no qualms about  stealing all it can from her so there is no chance that China will let Russia go  down, no chance at all.

Indeed, but China will sit back and let Russia exhaust itself militarily. There is no threat to Russian oil fields or wheat fields from Ukraine or NATO, so they do not need to get any more involved than they already are. Russia failing to take Ukraine, or even being magically pushed back to the 2022 border, changes nothing for them. In fact a financially impoverished Russia is a Russia willing to export more of what little technology it hasn’t already given away and sell its resources at cheaper rates. Witness the nearly decade long haggling over Siberia 2, as China foisted the infrastructure costs on Russia.

[Sinistar]

from the standpoint of the transfer of territory the russians are only going to be interested amalgamating the territory once known as novorossiya

 

this would complete the transfer of odesa kharkiv the donbas and would cut off ukraine from its remaining access to the black sea

this in itself would be devastating to ukraine but you see in the way that bit is left out- only that russia still loses

and so that is how you know ukraine is really a disposable proxy

 

the wheat products are not a threat to russia and not in itself what russia has ever communicated as a threat or what russia wants

it is really more of a problem for ukraine and the eu in a post war diddy about what to do with absorbing an economically ruined state after all of that

again which you see is not part of the calculation in the russia loses again plot hole

 

i also believe that russia does not want to capture western ukraine or all of ukraine like you hear from policy wonks and russia has no interest in it- they would be getting wrapped up in an insurgency for as long as they remain and there is nothing there that russia really needs from the standpoint of gaining anything economically

russia is a country spanning 11 time zones and so it is not territory in itself which russia needs

 

the russians have stated openly they are opposed to nato positioning itself in ukraine and the 'de-nazification' of ukraine- the latter of which is a nebulous goal and is nonspecific in how russia intends to do that

 

this is where i think it gets dangerous

because if after all of that there is in fact a zelensky government- assuming he has not fled abroad or is not taken out by hardliners and nationalists- because that is how they roll in that part of the world- or if that did happen and something even more hardline replaces it backed by an increasingly more desperate nato- the russians may continue west into kyiv or further- not to capture but to destroy everything since at that point the russians will figure that nato simply never will give up and will continue to use proxies as long as it can in ukraine

 

then of course there comes the real risk of nato getting involved at some point in all of that

which everyone you would think knows what comes next

 

that is probably what putin communicated in his call with trump and why trump suddenly turned around on the tomahawks - because on that phone call putin must have said something or must have outlined a potential target list outside of ukraine to make that topic disappear 

 

a @l12

[Josh]

I realize a lot of western posters here have unrealistic expectations, but if you think Russia is going to take Odessa this decade you are firmly inside their delusional ranks.

[Sinistar]

i am not predicting that nor am i predicting anything

i am laying out the roadmap of what it may look like under the scenario of russia advancing up to the dnieper

and what the leadership could be thinking

there is no certainty because nato could always intervene so therefore it is not a prediction

 

you continue to deny basic facts however 

i already saw this  when you denied that russia was in the kyiv area in 2022 as if you did not know that occurred and you continued to double down on denying that fact when it was pointed out to you

 

this is basically how the leadership in nato and the eu view it in the same way 

you are either doing this on purpose or you do not understand it

that is the danger that we have with this leadership doing this they do not understand it and they are in denial 

 

 

Edited November 7 by Sinistar

[seahawk]

The US needs to see the economic opportunity it has. It can destroy Europe as a competitor, that is a chance to good to miss. Russia and the US will make a deal that benefits both and Russia will take control of the Ukraine, but first it is the US interest to see Russia bleed and Europe destroy itself. 

European leaders need to change course and work with Russia. Accept legitimate Russian demands, disband NATO, form a partnership with Russia. 

[Roman Alymov]

Compilation of fiberFPV attacks on two Bogdana wheeled SPGs, BM-21 Grad and M109 SPG https://t.me/infomil_live/23882

    Note how dronea sre able to clerar the way into underground bunkers and manuver inside to hit engines.