Europe War in Ukraine - Thread 3

[wannabejack]

Russia Captures Fortified Factory District in Avdiivka, Ukrainian Troops Reportedly Outgunned

Reports from both sides tell of strong Russian advantages in artillery, air power and armored vehicles as they capture a stronghold of factories on the town’s southeastern edge.

www.kyivpost.com

Russian troops captured fortified positions held by Ukrainian forces for more than eight years on the southeastern edge of Avdiivka, near the Yasynuvata-2 railway station, official and open source reports said on Monday.

If consolidated, the Russian gains would leave thousands of Kyiv’s troops dug in throughout central Avdiivka, at the bottom of a funnel-shaped terrain pocket less than 15 kilometers wide, and under real risk of encirclement.

According to the weight of evidence, reports said, attacking Russian troops outnumber Ukrainian troops five to one, are able to launch air strikes with impunity, and possess strong advantages in howitzers, cannon and artillery ammunition.
Russian tanks are able to approach Ukrainian positions to near point-blank range and Ukrainian troops in the Avdiivka sector seem to lack anti-tank rockets and missiles needed to defend themselves, one DeepState report said.

“It appears, that (Ukraine’s) Western partners are unable to supply a sufficient number of anti-armor systems… as we wrote earlier, loss of the industrial sector was only a matter of time,” another report said.

According to soldier reports from both sides of the fighting, modern Western equipment operated by the Ukrainian military is limited in effectiveness due to near-total Russian air superiority over the battlefield, and ongoing shortages of 155mm howitzer ammunition.

 

[Millky95]

Russia Captures Fortified Factory District in Avdiivka, Ukrainian Troops Reportedly Outgunned

Reports from both sides tell of strong Russian advantages in artillery, air power and armored vehicles as they capture a stronghold of factories on the town’s southeastern edge.

www.kyivpost.com

Russian troops captured fortified positions held by Ukrainian forces for more than eight years on the southeastern edge of Avdiivka, near the Yasynuvata-2 railway station, official and open source reports said on Monday.

If consolidated, the Russian gains would leave thousands of Kyiv’s troops dug in throughout central Avdiivka, at the bottom of a funnel-shaped terrain pocket less than 15 kilometers wide, and under real risk of encirclement.

According to the weight of evidence, reports said, attacking Russian troops outnumber Ukrainian troops five to one, are able to launch air strikes with impunity, and possess strong advantages in howitzers, cannon and artillery ammunition.
Russian tanks are able to approach Ukrainian positions to near point-blank range and Ukrainian troops in the Avdiivka sector seem to lack anti-tank rockets and missiles needed to defend themselves, one DeepState report said.

“It appears, that (Ukraine’s) Western partners are unable to supply a sufficient number of anti-armor systems… as we wrote earlier, loss of the industrial sector was only a matter of time,” another report said.

According to soldier reports from both sides of the fighting, modern Western equipment operated by the Ukrainian military is limited in effectiveness due to near-total Russian air superiority over the battlefield, and ongoing shortages of 155mm howitzer ammunition.

Why can't we just ****ing give Ukraine what it needs?

 

[wannabejack]

Why can't we just ******* give Ukraine what it needs?

Francis Farrell: Ukraine could still lose the war. Let’s get some things straight

This November has been a particularly grim one here in Ukraine. Over the past month, two media sensations in big Western magazines served as a sober wake-up call about the state of the war. First, Simon Shuster’s profile in TIME magazine on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s “lonely fight”

kyivindependent.com

2. The main reason Ukraine finds itself in this position is because it wasn't given the weapons it needed to change the game before the war settled into this positional tussle.

3. While it remains taboo to admit, it’s now nearly impossible to deny that the West, in particular Washington, does not want a complete Ukrainian victory.

4. The West’s unwillingness to empower a Ukrainian victory is no clearer than in the issue of providing long-range missiles.

5. Ukraine’s war effort depends most of all on Washington, where bipartisan support for Ukraine is openly faltering in Congress, and a presidential election could bring it all down.

 

[Millky95]

Francis Farrell: Ukraine could still lose the war. Let’s get some things straight

This November has been a particularly grim one here in Ukraine. Over the past month, two media sensations in big Western magazines served as a sober wake-up call about the state of the war. First, Simon Shuster’s profile in TIME magazine on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s “lonely fight”

kyivindependent.com

2. The main reason Ukraine finds itself in this position is because it wasn't given the weapons it needed to change the game before the war settled into this positional tussle.

3. While it remains taboo to admit, it’s now nearly impossible to deny that the West, in particular Washington, does not want a complete Ukrainian victory.

4. The West’s unwillingness to empower a Ukrainian victory is no clearer than in the issue of providing long-range missiles.

5. Ukraine’s war effort depends most of all on Washington, where bipartisan support for Ukraine is openly faltering in Congress, and a presidential election could bring it all down.

**** Republicans

 

[Zidane98]

China screwing the Russians hard on the planned new gas pipeline. Thing is with Europe cutting itself off from Russian gas they need somewhere to dump it all. China can do as they please now safe in the knowledge that Putin has to dance to their tune.


Of course another option is withdraw from Ukraine, accept defeat, and work to restore international relations with EU and the west to reopen the European gas market with ready made infrastrcture in place to deliver it..........

 

[Visions]

* Republicans

They are shocking but Biden and the Democrats having exactly covered themselves in glory with all the dithering on the drip feeding of weapons and which ones so they can appease Putin.

 

[Millky95]

They are shocking but Biden and the Democrats having exactly covered themselves in glory with all the dithering on the drip feeding of weapons and which ones so they can appease Putin.

Agreed

 

[jatz14]

They are shocking but Biden and the Democrats having exactly covered themselves in glory with all the dithering on the drip feeding of weapons and which ones so they can appease Putin.

Except Biden cannot do it unilaterally, it needs the House, and the Republican majority is incapable of doing the political equivalent of wiping its own arse. They still cannot get any senior officers appointed because one Republican thinks the military is too woke.

 

[jatz14]

Francis Farrell: Ukraine could still lose the war. Let’s get some things straight

This November has been a particularly grim one here in Ukraine. Over the past month, two media sensations in big Western magazines served as a sober wake-up call about the state of the war. First, Simon Shuster’s profile in TIME magazine on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s “lonely fight”

kyivindependent.com

2. The main reason Ukraine finds itself in this position is because it wasn't given the weapons it needed to change the game before the war settled into this positional tussle.

3. While it remains taboo to admit, it’s now nearly impossible to deny that the West, in particular Washington, does not want a complete Ukrainian victory.

4. The West’s unwillingness to empower a Ukrainian victory is no clearer than in the issue of providing long-range missiles.

5. Ukraine’s war effort depends most of all on Washington, where bipartisan support for Ukraine is openly faltering in Congress, and a presidential election could bring it all down.

The other view is, Russia already lost the war, it lost it last year, it just hasn't lost the fighting. The only reason its still fighting is because of the national humiliation of withdrawing, and Putin.

Russia lost the war, and even if it drives the Ukrainians back next summer, that doesn't change.

You fight a war for a reason, you have goals and objectives in mind, and if you win all the fighting, and achieve none of those objectives and goals, you lost.

And I dont understand the argument really. The West are warmongering mercenaries, they want the war to fund the military industrial complex and make themselves rich, and do it by not selling weapons to Ukraine?

Or, they are using Ukraine ruthlessly to grind down Russia in a never ending war, by not giving them the weapons to destroy the Russians?

I mean, if the West wants the Russian military destroyed, and wants the war for that purpose, then giving them the weapons to destroy the Russian military makes sense. Not giving them doesn't.

If they are using the war to enrich the West, then, not selling them the weapons doesn't make sense either.


By what logic would it make sense for the West to deliberately prolong the war? And what evidence do you for this.

And the fact the war has been prolonged isn't evidence this was a desired outcome. Incompetence, lack of forward looking policy, competing interests, lack of capacity, lack of will, self interest, governments being loaded with politicians that just dont care about Ukraine, or prefer Russia. All of these could achieve the same impact, without anyone ever having a policy or preference for prolonging the war.

If something can be explained by conspiracy, or incompetence, go with incompetence.

 

[Baldur]

The other view is, Russia already lost the war, it lost it last year, it just hasn't lost the fighting. The only reason its still fighting is because of the national humiliation of withdrawing, and Putin.

Russia lost the war, and even if it drives the Ukrainians back next summer, that doesn't change.

You fight a war for a reason, you have goals and objectives in mind, and if you win all the fighting, and achieve none of those objectives and goals, you lost.

And I dont understand the argument really. The West are warmongering mercenaries, they want the war to fund the military industrial complex and make themselves rich, and do it by not selling weapons to Ukraine?

Or, they are using Ukraine ruthlessly to grind down Russia in a never ending war, by not giving them the weapons to destroy the Russians?

I mean, if the West wants the Russian military destroyed, and wants the war for that purpose, then giving them the weapons to destroy the Russian military makes sense. Not giving them doesn't.

If they are using the war to enrich the West, then, not selling them the weapons doesn't make sense either.


By what logic would it make sense for the West to deliberately prolong the war? And what evidence do you for this.

And the fact the war has been prolonged isn't evidence this was a desired outcome. Incompetence, lack of forward looking policy, competing interests, lack of capacity, lack of will, self interest, governments being loaded with politicians that just dont care about Ukraine, or prefer Russia. All of these could achieve the same impact, without anyone ever having a policy or preference for prolonging the war.

If something can be explained by conspiracy, or incompetence, go with incompetence.

I believe many western leaders are fearful of what outright Russian defeat looks like, they see a Russian coup, civil unrest and piss themselves becouse of all those nukes. So they do what it takes to stop Russia winning but never enough to allow Ukraine to win. They are fearful of Russian victory and also fearful of Russian defeat. Powerful old men who have no wish to alter the status quo that gave them power.

Biden in particular I see this way, he also faces a domestic facist opposition that would love a Russian victory. Olaf Scholz as well but he also pines for that sweet Russian gas, and the German people are peacenik, inclined to stick their heads in the sand and chant Nein Nein. Basically there are as many reasons for the wests collective lack of will as there are western countries.

But yes, some overarching western plan for a stalemate, not so much. Nevertheless there are undoubtedly some in the west to whom a stalemate which continues to grind down Russia is the least bad outcome.

 

[Visions]

Except Biden cannot do it unilaterally, it needs the House, and the Republican majority is incapable of doing the political equivalent of wiping its own arse. They still cannot get any senior officers appointed because one Republican thinks the military is too woke.

Yes understand that is the case now.

Last year was a different story where Democrats had control of both houses while Ukraine burned and Biden and his team were debating about sending Abrams tanks, long range ATACMS, basically any offensive weapons.

That dithering (along with Europe) basically allowed the orcs to setup their multi layered defences with tonnes of landmines making the counter almost impossible.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Except Biden cannot do it unilaterally, it needs the House, and the Republican majority is incapable of doing the political equivalent of wiping its own arse. They still cannot get any senior officers appointed because one Republican thinks the military is too woke.

He had his chance and failed.

 

[wannabejack]

The other view is, Russia already lost the war, it lost it last year, it just hasn't lost the fighting. The only reason its still fighting is because of the national humiliation of withdrawing, and Putin.

Russia lost the war, and even if it drives the Ukrainians back next summer, that doesn't change.

You fight a war for a reason, you have goals and objectives in mind, and if you win all the fighting, and achieve none of those objectives and goals, you lost.

And I dont understand the argument really. The West are warmongering mercenaries, they want the war to fund the military industrial complex and make themselves rich, and do it by not selling weapons to Ukraine?

Or, they are using Ukraine ruthlessly to grind down Russia in a never ending war, by not giving them the weapons to destroy the Russians?

I mean, if the West wants the Russian military destroyed, and wants the war for that purpose, then giving them the weapons to destroy the Russian military makes sense. Not giving them doesn't.

If they are using the war to enrich the West, then, not selling them the weapons doesn't make sense either.


By what logic would it make sense for the West to deliberately prolong the war? And what evidence do you for this.

And the fact the war has been prolonged isn't evidence this was a desired outcome. Incompetence, lack of forward looking policy, competing interests, lack of capacity, lack of will, self interest, governments being loaded with politicians that just dont care about Ukraine, or prefer Russia. All of these could achieve the same impact, without anyone ever having a policy or preference for prolonging the war.

If something can be explained by conspiracy, or incompetence, go with incompetence.

Ukraine's position (goal) is that russian troops must pull back beyond Ukraine's internationally recognised borders. If this doesn't happen because of lack of proper support from the west and Ukraine is forced to negotiate does this count as Ukraine losing the war? If it does than both Ukraine and russia have lost the war.

russia can still achieve one goal and that's at the negotiating table where Ukraine may be forced to give something up if the west don't give them the support they need. Russia has nothing to give up and any promises they give will count for nothing.

 

[barreness]

Why can't we just ******* give Ukraine what it needs?

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

 

[Crankyhawk]

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

I doubt that is an acceptable outcome for Ukraine, both parties need to be roughly equally unhappy (why I think it will be borders back to pre March 2022 ie Russia keeps Crimea and Ukraine joins NATO)

 

[LittleG]

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

That is appeasement and hasn’t worked in the past. Russia has been appeased with Crimea already…. How much more territory must Ukraine give up? Kyiv? Odessa?

Each War Russia will take a bit more and a bit more and a bit more….

 

[Mobbs]

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

Doesn't work this way. SHOULD work this way, but it's been attempted time after time and every time the RF will return again and again.

 

[faible]

Doesn't work this way. SHOULD work this way, but it's been attempted time after time and every time the RF will return again and again.

In that scenario Ukraine joining NATO is a huge shift though

 

[Mobbs]

Russia Captures Fortified Factory District in Avdiivka, Ukrainian Troops Reportedly Outgunned

Reports from both sides tell of strong Russian advantages in artillery, air power and armored vehicles as they capture a stronghold of factories on the town’s southeastern edge.

www.kyivpost.com

Russian troops captured fortified positions held by Ukrainian forces for more than eight years on the southeastern edge of Avdiivka, near the Yasynuvata-2 railway station, official and open source reports said on Monday.

If consolidated, the Russian gains would leave thousands of Kyiv’s troops dug in throughout central Avdiivka, at the bottom of a funnel-shaped terrain pocket less than 15 kilometers wide, and under real risk of encirclement.

According to the weight of evidence, reports said, attacking Russian troops outnumber Ukrainian troops five to one, are able to launch air strikes with impunity, and possess strong advantages in howitzers, cannon and artillery ammunition.
Russian tanks are able to approach Ukrainian positions to near point-blank range and Ukrainian troops in the Avdiivka sector seem to lack anti-tank rockets and missiles needed to defend themselves, one DeepState report said.

“It appears, that (Ukraine’s) Western partners are unable to supply a sufficient number of anti-armor systems… as we wrote earlier, loss of the industrial sector was only a matter of time,” another report said.

According to soldier reports from both sides of the fighting, modern Western equipment operated by the Ukrainian military is limited in effectiveness due to near-total Russian air superiority over the battlefield, and ongoing shortages of 155mm howitzer ammunition.

I haven't had a chance to analyse much for a few days due to heavy workload. Now that I look at this article, I'm kind of thrown by what they are saying. This is a really weird kind of report. That station as far as I knew has been under RF control since 2014. [DeepState] can tell you basically the same thing.

The alternative, which (using Russian language) might refer to a station within Avdiivka which is intended for lines TO Yasunuvata (for example in St Petersburg they have stations called Moscow station and Finland station, because that's where the trains GO. However there's usually a "skaya" suffix in these cases (unsure about Ukrainian) and I can't see any such station there. So, baffling.

I dunno if they mean to talk about a different place. And its from the Kyiv Post, but followed by a justified rant on how we have been shit at supporting them against the RF invasion. This suggests to me that the bit about how we've let them down, is the main thrust of this article. Kuleba level way of dealing with western media. My thought's is that it's an attention grabber more than a report of situational change.

The rail line near Stepove, now THAT'S worthy of some nailbiting.

Anyway, Yasunuvata (highlighting what I am pretty sure is Railway Station No2:



Thanks for eating up half an hour of my morning time wannabejack lol

 

[Millky95]

In that scenario Ukraine joining NATO is a huge shift though

Which requires Russia to withdraw and they never will. The last thing Russia wants is a Ukraine in NATO cause it means in 10-20 years they can't do this all again taking Ukraine piece by piece. Which is something I don't think barreness quite understands yet

 

[Mobbs]

In that scenario Ukraine joining NATO is a huge shift though

I'd be concerned that all which would be left to join NATO by the time its ratified, by the time Hungary's influence is negated, etc, Ukraine will have its capital in Lviv and and one oblast in each of Rivne and Ternopil.

RF aren't just gonna stop invading because there's a negotiation and a ceasefire. They've proven that they absolutely do not do this. They'll keep trying to take territory throughout the entire process. And that will additionally keep Ukraine in a state of war, which is another obstacle.

 

[Mobbs]

Which requires Russia to withdraw and they never will. The last thing Russia wants is a Ukraine in NATO cause it means in 10-20 years they can't do this all again taking Ukraine piece by piece. Which is something I don't think barreness quite understands yet

On top of this the native Tatars in Crimea, plus indeed indeed the Ukrainians in Crimea, will be very thankful to our pressure to get behind RF's explicit intent to criminalise them out of existence.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

The Dnipro only makes up a tiny % of any new border and It’s also extremely unlikely Russia ever allow Ukraine to join NATO.
I don’t think it’s war mongering, I just don’t think what you are suggesting is realistic

 

[Baldur]

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

"peace for our time"

 

[Bloods86]

Because that results in nuclear war?

Jesus christ the war mongers in this thread. The fight is at a stalemate, go to the negotiation table, the dnipro river is a brilliant defensible position and can be fortified to the nines

Russia has crimea and a land bridge to it, Ukraine hasn't lost too much and will be accepted into nato, stop the death ffs

This basically hinges on Ukraine joining NATO. If they were up for handing over legal recognition for a significant part of the country, which is a terrible outcome, especially for any Ukrainians living in those areas, there's nothing except NATO membership which would prevent Russia regrouping and taking more in a few years.

If you think you can get all NATO members to agree to accept Ukraine in while Russia occupies part of Ukraine, even if conceded by the central government, good luck.

Without it, Russia just tries again and if outside support is lessened, maybe Russia proper ends up bordering Poland. How's that for risking nuclear war?