Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ukraine and the Russian invasion, 2022-24

That's a two paragraph summary from a nothing paper; it tells you even less then the Grauniad. Go digging through six week old Twitter if you want, I don't have time and I was paying attention at the time. I suppose the possibility I am mistake exists (though it would have been a strange thing to claim) but I am certainly not inventing things.
 
That's a two paragraph summary from a nothing paper; it tells you even less then the Grauniad. Go digging through six week old Twitter if you want, I don't have time and I was paying attention at the time. I suppose the possibility I am mistake exists (though it would have been a strange thing to claim) but I am certainly not inventing things.
You are inventing things. And it's plain to anyone with eyes to read. Did you not see the fucking quote "the Russian occupation forces operating in Ukraine have stockpiles of ammunition and food for no more than three days"?
 
It's one thing giving unconditional support to Ukraine in defending against an invasion. It would be another to deny that Western nations are in this to further their own agendas. Parts of the US establishment have seen a showdown with Russia as inevitable and even necessary for a long time.
Can you elaborate on your second and third sentences, please?
 
South East London before the DLR was a relative beautiful secret because of the Underground map.
Now they’re turning Lewisham into some kind of sub American area, with all the high rises thrown up so quick the lifts and plumbing don’t work.
Selling matchboxes for half a million quid.
Dear old Woolwich will probably go the same way.
 
South East London before the DLR was a relative beautiful secret because of the Underground map.
Now they’re turning Lewisham into some kind of sub American area, with all the high rises thrown up so quick the lifts and plumbing don’t work.
Selling matchboxes for half a million quid.
Dear old Woolwich will probably go the same way.
After Ukraine I can see Lewisham and possibly Woolwich being the next battleground tbh
 
You are inventing things. And it's plain to anyone with eyes to read. Did you not see the fucking quote "the Russian occupation forces operating in Ukraine have stockpiles of ammunition and food for no more than three days"?

ISW said:
Russian forces face continuing logistics and reinforcement issues. The Ukrainian General Staff specified for the first time on March 22 that Russian forces—particularly highlighting the 7thAir Assault Division operating around Kherson—are suffering casualties due to a poor medical supply system and lack of medicine.[4]The Ukrainian General Staff additionally stated that Russian forces face growing supply issues, claiming some unspecified units have stockpiles of food and ammunition for no more than three days.[5]

 
maomao is right, although not very clear, those reports mainly concerned the situation the north, the south & east was clearly different with much shorter supply lines, meaning they could be re-supplied quickly. There was a number reports from around the same time suggesting the war could go on for months, or even longer.

21st March -
That said, there are three Ukraine scenarios which currently seem most likely. The first — which is both the most tragic and the most probable — is that this war continues for many months. The second possibility — put it at maybe 30 per cent — is that there is a peace settlement. The third scenario — which is perhaps 10 per cent — is that there is some sort of political upheaval in Russia, involving the overthrow of President Vladimir Putin and a new approach to Ukraine.


26th March -
Even these more limited aims promise fierce fighting. Kharkiv – close to the Russian border – has already been subjected to heavy bombardment, whose intensity is likely to increase, and Ukraine has few options for preventing it.

On the other hand, the fight northwards along the Dnieper will probably be met with stiff resistance, with continuing western arms supplies leading to heavy attrition among Russian armour. The outcome of this fighting is far from inevitable.

It would be a serious error to expect the war to end at this point, however, even if local ceasefires and expanded negotiations suggest diplomacy may prevail. This is for three reasons.


26th March -
U.S. President Joe Biden said on Saturday that Russia's invasion of Ukraine threatened to unravel global security, and that the world's democracies must prepare for a long fight against autocracy.

"The West is now stronger, more united than it has ever been," Biden told hundreds of Polish elected officials, students and U.S. embassy staff, many holding U.S., Polish and Ukrainian flags. We need to steel ourselves for the long fight ahead."

 
You are inventing things. And it's plain to anyone with eyes to read. Did you not see the fucking quote "the Russian occupation forces operating in Ukraine have stockpiles of ammunition and food for no more than three days"?
Do you have an original source for your quote?
 
maomao is right, although not very clear, those reports mainly concerned the situation the north, the south & east was clearly different with much shorter supply lines, meaning they could be re-supplied quickly. There was a number reports from around the same time suggesting the war could go on for months, or even longer.

21st March -



26th March -



26th March -


let's look at Cid's link, where i submit they're not talking about the north and west - the mention of kherson ought to alert you that they're not talking about kyiv



1651739326638.png
 
I think to be fair there have tended to be swings in media opinion just because of 24 hour news cycle, few people on the ground, 'oh look twitter' journalism. It's fair to say that, for many phases of the invasion, Russian capabilities were overestimated by people who knew what they were talking about. But the press itself just swung with whatever current was prevailing at the time.

I don't think that necessarily tells us what comes next... Russia has learned some lessons from initial phases. Reflected in redeployments etc... Much improved supply lines, moving more toward using artillery than throwing troops in etc.

Western aid may have its limits too; Our wonderful friends at Raytheon saying Stinger manufacture will hit bottlenecks (though I read a bit more on that and seems to relate to them being gradually phased out), and other systems are starting to touch strategic stockpiles. Russia's strikes on infrastructure are also significant here, they seem to have moved to targeting anything used to bring western aid to the front (though US seems to think they're not very good at it - that was Pentagon press sec yesterday). And of course Ukraine has apparently managed to target some of their supply lines...

Ukraine is inevitably going to have issues with personnel too - they've openly admitted that they've suffered significant losses (wiki estimates work out to 2,500-4,000 dead, 10,000 wounded at April 15th). We don't know what proportion of those are from experienced units (it includes national guard and army), but it's probably fair to say it's significant.

So my incredibly relevant strategic assessment is who the fuck really knows? Things seemed stalled again at the moment... Redeployed units from Mariupol may be significant. But doesn't look like Russia the 9th is going to be a particularly happy day for Putin.
 
let's look at Cid's link, where i submit they're not talking about the north and west - the mention of kherson ought to alert you that they're not talking about kyiv



View attachment 321252
The little numbers at the end of the sentences tell you that the sentences are summaries of different parts of one or more original sources. The words 'some' and 'unspecified' should alert you that they're not talking about the whole Russian army.

If you'd been paying attention at the time rather than relying on the Guardian we wouldn't be having this conversation.
 
let's look at Cid's link, where i submit they're not talking about the north and west - the mention of kherson ought to alert you that they're not talking about kyiv



View attachment 321252

But, that's just a statement from the Ukrainians, and it didn't matter because as I said in my last post 'the south & east was clearly different with much shorter supply lines, meaning they could be re-supplied quickly.'
 
The little numbers at the end of the sentences tell you that the sentences are summaries of different parts of one or more original sources. The words 'some' and 'unspecified' should alert you that they're not talking about the whole Russian army.

If you'd been paying attention at the time rather than relying on the Guardian we wouldn't be having this conversation.
did you miss the bit where i mentioned the express and the mirror? or the bit where i mentioned this was an example?
 
But, that's just a statement from the Ukrainians, and it didn't matter because as I said in my last post 'the south & east was clearly different with much shorter supply lines, meaning they could be re-supplied quickly.'
despite the bluster from you and maomao i suggest my point stands that we're being told things (in media like the guardian, mirror, express etc) which simply aren't the case.
 
despite the bluster from you and maomao i suggest my point stands that we're being told things (in media like the guardian, mirror, express etc) which simply aren't the case.

They weren't so much telling us anything, just reporting with caveats on what the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were saying, which always needs taking with a massive pinch of salt

Russian forces have only three further days of fuel, food and ammunition left to conduct the war after a breakdown in their supply chains, Ukrainian military commanders have alleged.

The claims of major shortages were described as “plausible” by western officials although they said they were unable to corroborate the analysis.
 
Both sides must be knackered at this point, Russians probably more so - the best units they have been through the wringer or been in combat for two solid months.
Yes. They are redeploying forces from the Kyiv offensive to the east, without a break. Not good for morale or effectiveness.
 
despite the bluster from you and maomao i suggest my point stands that we're being told things (in media like the guardian, mirror, express etc) which simply aren't the case.

I'm not sure anyone has argued that that though... I suspect we've gone off on one of those rabbit trails where we're all having different arguments with different points. It's quite possible for mainstream media to come out with wildly overoptimistic statements based on propaganda, at the same time that more sober sources are being overly pessimistic.
 
Back
Top Bottom