Reply to Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My take: Ukrainians are allowed one last major battle, then forced to negotiate. After that, a slow and steady guerrilla war is fought while there is some semblance of pause in this conflict, Israeli-Palestinian style. 
Russia is still under sanctions though some od them are quietly not enforced or even cancelled. Ukraine gets weapons but only those enough to stop the Russians from advancing. 
Russia continues deteriorating under sanctions, while Ukraine is more or less stabilized but never reaches its former economic indicators.
It goes on for decades. [/quote]

This certainly isn't going to go on for decades. This is nothing like Israel-Palestine. Russia just on its own is deep into a doom loop. It's a demographic catastrophe that the war in Ukraine has only accelerated. Almost every young professional university-educated male, particularly in IT, left the country at the outset of the war. And they're not coming back. What remains is an increasingly old and barely literate population. An incredibly high percentage of Russian men are afflicted with alcoholism. Economically, for thirty years Russia has managed to get by as Europe's gas station. Europe isn't buying anymore. They're done will never go back to being dependent on Russian oil and gas. Selling deeply discounted oil to India does not support a superpower. Politically, there is no "system." It's a dictatorship. Putin is ill. The moment he leaves the scene, chaos reigns. Medvedev is a drunk. The rest are warlords. It's not going to go well.

And then there is the war in Ukraine. Best estimates are that Russia has suffered roughly 200,000 casualties. 70,000 dead and the rest crippled or injured. Ukraine has certainly suffered staggering losses themselves. But they are fighting to save their families and their land. There is no higher motivation to fight. Most of the advanced western weapons systems promised to Ukraine have arrived - Patriot missile systems, Leopard tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles, and very significantly, UK-supplied Storm Shadow long distance missiles, which are five times more powerful than HIMARS and have a longer range. Just as importantly, tens of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers have been trained up to NATO standards at bases throughout Europe and even the US, where they are being trained to use Abrams tanks, which should arrive in Ukraine by the Fall.

Meanwhile, the Russian military has fallen apart. More than 2500 tanks gone. At present rates of destruction, all their APCs will be wiped out by the end of the year. Shortages of ammunition. And on and on and on. None of this can be easily replenished. Military leadership is weak and disorganized. Wagner and regular army do not coordinate anymore. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. In recent days, Ukrainian forces have conducted probing attacks throughout the front, including in Bakhmut. In all cases, Russian forces were destroyed or fled. On Russian Telegram channels, they are in blind panic.

I'm increasingly confident that the upcoming Ukrainian counter-offensive will turn into a rout and this war will be over by then end of the year.

[/quote]

That sure is a lot of words. Let me point out that even though Palestine isn’t exactly the strongest nation, it’s not going away, and Russia won’t as well, even when it bleeds out under sanctions. 
As to your last paragraph, how do you think the counteroffensive will end? And how will the war end.[/quote]

Well, judging by today's events, in which Russia shot down four of its own aircraft - two Mi-8 helicopters, an Su-34 and an Su-35 - this war won't last long at all. These all went down in Bryansk Oblast, which is in Russia itself. The Russians are doing an excellent job of destroying themselves. They are terrified of the upcoming counter-offensive and the vast array of NATO weapon systems that are about to rain down upon them. Shooting down four of their own aircraft in one day within Russia indicates that this is a military in blind panic with a command and control structure that is effectively nonexistent.

As for how the counter-offensive unfolds and ends, I have no idea. Ukraine has shown itself to be very imaginative and unpredictable. If I were to guess, it begins with shaping the battlefield - taking out behind the lines fuel and ammo depots, command centers, and all known high concentrations of troops. No doubt the west is feeding them intelligence picked up from satellites, surveillance drones, and intercepted communications. Ukraine now has the weaponry to reach well beyond the front lines, with the caveat that they cannot use American weapons specifically to hit targets within Russia.

The front is approximately 900 km long. I would suspect they attack all along it and then see where opportunities present themselves for major breakthroughs. This is what they did successfully last year when they retook Kherson and Kharkiv. Strategically, I suspect they have two major objectives. One, a push south toward the Sea of Azov, thereby shattering the land bridge between Donbass and Crimea, which would then only be very precariously connected to Russia itself by a 12 mile bridge over the Kerch Straight. Ukraine has already knocked out this bridge once and they can do it again at will. I believe at present only the road portion has been rebuilt. The Russians have been unable to repair the rail link. I suspect the Ukrainians will leave the bridge alone for now to allow Russians an avenue to escape. I think they intend to lay siege to Crimea for the time being. The Black Sea fleet has already left Sevastopol and really isn't much of a threat to Ukraine presently.

Secondly, I suspect they'll seek to encircle the bulk of Russian forces around Bakhmut just as the Soviet Army did against the German 6th Army in WWII during the battle of Stalingrad. It will break Russian and Wagner forces. Already, in recent days, the Ukrainian Army has managed to take back 17 sq km of territory around Bakhmut. This is where Russia has deployed a very significant amount of its forces - to little avail. I think Ukraine goes in for the kill there.

If these two strategic goals are met I think Russian forces collapse and retreat everywhere. Russia could theoretically mobilize another 4 million men. But they have no weapons to fight with. Ukraine spends the remainder of the year mopping up Luhansk and Donetsk. And then only Crimea remains.

Meanwhile, Russia itself becomes increasingly unstable - politically and economically. How that plays out is anyone's guess. But in the meantime, a negotiated solution is found for Crimea - something along the lines of having "special status" within a sovereign Ukraine. Russian forces leave peacefully. Ethnic Russians who lived there prior to 2014 are allowed to remain. Ukraine eventually joins the EU and NATO. Russia withers. The world's concern then focuses on ensuring that Russia does not collapse into civil war and anarchy, which no one wants. But that's another story.

My two cents      [/quote]

American who's never been in the box?  Sorry, but it shows.

First, I'd be very surprised if Ukraine accepts a negotiated solution for Crimea unless it's shoved down their throats and they won't be happy about it.  My guess is Poland and others may push against it as well.  This would likely be perceived as a sign of weakness.  Capitulation.  Subservience.

"Special Status?"  Like in Bosnia?  No, sorry, go fish.  I don't think you understand the 'diplomatic negotiations' that occurred behind the scenes.  Those tactics wouldn't work against Russia.  It's a nuclear power.

"The group's sole purpose was to provide an alternative mechanism to the UN for negotiat ing a peace settlement in the region. Since it had none of the UN's humanitarian and peacekeep ing responsibilities to divert its attention or weaken its freedom to negotiate forcefully, the group's relationship with the Bosnian Serbs was more overtly confrontational than the UN's. This suited the US representative to the group, Ambassador Holbrooke, just fine."
"Upon hearing of the Mrkale shelling, for example, he suggested publicly that the proper response might be a bombing campaign against the Serbs of up to six months."
https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/Portals/10/ASPJ/journals/Volume-11_Issue-1-4/1997_Vol11_No3.pdf

Second, I'm curious how you believe Ukraine will encircle Bakmut?  I would look very closely at this map.  
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a7f6a6f5a9448496de641cf64bd375

It looks like the Russians right now are in control of the high ground both North and South of the city.  The choices are to either (a) attack and capture two mountains simultaneously, or (b) drive down the middle and keep the Russians split and shoot for their supply route on E40 to cut their main supply route.  Good luck trying to hump supplies up those mountains if Russia is control of E40.

I'm glad you're only on DCUMS and not making US military decisions.  You'll get people killed.  Seriously.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics