Russian Invasion of Ukraine 2022

[Husky_Khan]

Tanks don't like staying on bridges, they just crave that water. It is known.

Speaking of which... I mean clearly there's a collapsed bridge there but still.

Nothing like a little dip in the water with a local civilian.



Honestly this could just be an accident. Ice Fishing when the weather warms up is always risky.

The airbase which reportedly houses the TB2 drones was hit by a missile strike early in the Invasion IIRC and the Russians (or people on the internet lol) stated that two or four or all of the TB2 drones were shot down in the opening days. Here's the tweet from before about the Airbase being hit.

 

[History Learner]

If accurate-I wasn't aware Chernihiv and Sumy had been confirmed as fallen-it's a good indication of what I was getting at earlier. Apparently the kessel forming in the Donbass has about ~45,000 Ukrainians in it, no idea if that includes Mariupol too or that is counted as separate. Very large percentage of the Ukrainian Army in danger of being destroyed in the next 24 hours.

 

[Husky_Khan]

If accurate-I wasn't aware Chernihiv and Sumy had been confirmed as fallen-it's a good indication of what I was getting at earlier. Apparently the kessel forming in the Donbass has about ~45,000 Ukrainians in it, no idea if that includes Mariupol too or that is counted as separate. Very large percentage of the Ukrainian Army in danger of being destroyed in the next 24 hours.

He edited someone elses map in the comments when challenged as well.



Didn't clarify the situations of those cities. Maybe he made the map out of brevity when it came to utilizing blue circles. One would think there'd be more random telegram and tweets about the cities falling over the past few hours.

Then he states this later.



It's a War of Maps on Twitter.

 

[JagerIV]

What do we recon a reasonable number of casualties for the Russians to win and it not be a pyric victory? Russia for example lost about 7,000 in the Second Chechen War. US casualties in the Iraq war added up to about 25,000 dead, 120,000 wounded (US and Iraqi locals).

US comparatively lost 33,000 battle deaths in the Korean War, 10,000 of that fighting the N. Koreans pre China involvement. N. Korea comparatively seems to have lost about 300,000 casualties in that War, as an example of what losses of this kind of war can theoretically be.

Ukraine seems like it has maybe 200,000 active duty troops, so by vague rules of thumb of casualties that can be absorbed while staying functional, Ukraine can maybe 20,000 casualties in a short period before things fall appart?

Russia seems to have about 280,000 active personnel. So, they can potentially incur about 30,000 casualties before falling apparat.

Total front seems to be about 1,800 km. Looking at the first source I found, force density on the attack is supposed to be about 5 km/brigade, about a 5,000 man force. 1,800 km suggests you would want on the offensive about 360 Brigades, a force of about 1.8 million. So, that explains some of the limited scale of the attacks: if the Russians only have about 200,000 troops that's 1/9th of what would ideally have. If the attack is only carried out by about 100,000 troops, that's enough for about 20 Brigades or an attack on about a 100 km. That's enough for just barely the left side strike of the push on Kiev.

So, neither force really has the numbers to do continuous large fronts. Certainly on major fronts. So, the fronts likely are fairly weakly held, leaving a lot of room for maneuvers, and attacks can't have that large of a commitment: 1,800 km with 200,000 committed to defending the lines is a mere 100 ish men per km, less than a company. And leaves very few troops to pull together into an offensive: I'm not sure either side has more than a division scale force available for offensive operations on any of the, 5? offensive areas?

 

[Husky_Khan]

What do we recon a reasonable number of casualties for the Russians to win and it not be a pyric victory? Russia for example lost about 7,000 in the Second Chechen War. US casualties in the Iraq war added up to about 25,000 dead, 120,000 wounded (US and Iraqi locals).

US comparatively lost 33,000 battle deaths in the Korean War, 10,000 of that fighting the N. Koreans pre China involvement. N. Korea comparatively seems to have lost about 300,000 casualties in that War, as an example of what losses of this kind of war can theoretically be.

Well the initial Invasion of Iraq for the Coalition inflicted deaths in the low hundred IIRC *checks Wikipedia* 196 killed (including 24 Peshmerga) up to May 1st of 2003 when it was considered officially over.

Iraqi casualties were projected at between 7600 to 45,000 with maybe the lower end I guess being more reasonable.

The five twelve days of fun that was the Russo-Georgian War was 163-170 killed (65-67 Russians) killed on their side and 180 Georgians killed.

I'd actually be surprised if any insurgency approaches the long term intensity of those in Afghanistan or Iraq though and lead to the long drag of hundreds or thousands of casualties across years.

 

[WolfBear]

Question: While NATO significantly expanded to the east, placing large numbers of troops and missiles in the east was never a NATO objective, right? If so, then should Russia really complain all that much about NATO expansion to the east?

 

[sillygoose]

Question: While NATO significantly expanded to the east, placing large numbers of troops and missiles in the east was never a NATO objective, right? If so, then should Russia really complain all that much about NATO expansion to the east?

The ability to infiltrate agents and cause trouble. Why does China what North Korea to be their buffer state? Or the US wanting to the Western Hemisphere in their orbit exclusively? They freaked out due to Russia sticking their nose into Cuba and Venezeula.

 

[Sailor.X]

I am just gonna put this here.

 

[WolfBear]

I am just gonna put this here.

Needs a BLM sign and a rainbow flag!

 

[Marduk]

A certain someone apparently is agreeing that the invasion is not going well for Russia.

 

[WolfBear]

Russian nationalist Anatoly Karlin gloating that Russia has conquered parts of Kharkiv and is still near Kiev:

 

[SchrodingersWehraboo]

Getting close to “trust the plan” (“it’s gonna be biblical” was a frequent catch phrase) with that tweet, but Karlin is more grounded than Q folks and time will tell.

 

[Husky_Khan]

More unverified Twitterings.

Video and Geolocation of Russian troops apparently in the Port City of Berdyansk on the Coast of the Sea of Azov.



Alleged pictures of destroyed Russian vehicles that were in a Convoy in Northeast Ukraine.



Current denial of airspace to Russia map.



It's not all bad. Looks like Serbia, Kosovo AND Bosnia are agreeing on something so... uhhh things are getting better?

Russian Ruble is plunging in early trading at rates of between 20-40%.

Ukraine conflict: Russia doubles interest rate after rouble slumps

The Russian currency sinks to a record low against the dollar after Western countries impose new sanctions.

www.bbc.com

Fighting is going on in Kharkov.



And in a "shocking" development, the Belarus legislature has approved the Constitutional change for Belarus' previous non-nuclear status to come to an end.

The referendum was held Sunday as the ex-Soviet country’s neighbour Ukraine is under attack from Russian troops and delegations from Moscow and Kyiv are expected to meet for talks on the Belarusian border.

Central Election Commission head Igor Karpenko said 65.16 percent of referendum participants voted in favour of the amendments and 10.07 percent voted against, Russian news agencies reported.

According to Karpenko, voter turnout stood at 78.63 percent.

To come into force, the amendments need to receive at least 50 percent of the vote with a turnout of over half the electorate.

Belarus votes to give up non-nuclear status - Breitbart

Belarusians voted Monday to allow the country to host nuclear weapons and Russian forces permanently, results showed, part of a package of constitutional

www.breitbart.com

Some brief details on the upcoming talks scheduled to take place on the Belarus-Ukraine Border Monday Morning.

The talks, the first since Russia unleashed a full scale invasion of Ukraine last week, would be held without preconditions and are the result of a phone call between Zelenskiyy and the Belarusian president, Zelenskiyy said.

Ukraine and Russia agree to talks on Belarus border without preconditions: Zelenskiyy

Ukrainian and Russian officials will meet for talks at a venue on the Belarusian border with Ukraine, President Volodymyr Zelenskiyy’s office said on

english.alarabiya.net

Also I guess fighter jets are in the works for Military Aid to Ukraine @49ersfootball .

Can Ukraine Really Use Donated Fighter Jets? That Depends

After EU says it will send some aircraft to Ukraine, a retired U.S. fighter chief explains how that might work.

www.defenseone.com

Shows what I know! The planes that would be offered up are theorized to be older Mig-29's and Su-25's of which Ukrainian pilots would already be familiar with.

 

[Bacle]

Georgia was the aggressor in 2008 whereas Ukraine was not the aggressor right now; that made a huge difference in Western attitudes between 2008 and right now, most likely.

The problem is that I suspect that for many Ukrainians, this Russian invasion is only going to reinforce their belief that only NATO membership would offer genuine, long-term security for their country. This would be especially true considering that Putin and likely many Russians still view Ukraine as an artificial country and want it for its human capital:

Regathering of the Russian Lands

The Empire, Long Divided, Must Unite

akarlin.substack.com

Russians have always had designs on Ukraine even when Ukraine was not seriously considering NATO membership. You remember Putin's attempt to bully Yanukovych, an opponent of NATO membership of Ukraine, to join the Eurasian Union? :

Russian embargo of Ukrainian goods - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And really, one has a perfectly legitimate question: Why exactly is Baltic membership in NATO acceptable for Russia but Ukrainian membership in NATO is unacceptable for Russia? Russia has a lot of nukes to protect itself either way. As Anatoly Karlin writes in the same article from above:

"We live in the ICBM age"

This, of course, means that Ukraine's value as a buffer for Russia is much, much less than it previously was. Especially when the NATO Baltic members are already so close to St. Petersburg and when NATO already has ICBMs.

The answer is simpler than you think; oil/natgas.

Ukraine has a bunch of new reserves discovered about a decade ago, part of it in the Donbas, and part off-shore near Crimea.

The whole conflict in Ukraine is more over oil and some regional gripes, than about where armed forces are stationed.

 

[SchrodingersWehraboo]

Belarus news is interesting. Lukashenko mentioned a “referendum” back when the war started, I thought it would involve union with Russia.

 

[WolfBear]

Belarus news is interesting. Lukashenko mentioned a “referendum” back when the war started, I thought it would involve union with Russia.

Well, did it?

The answer is simpler than you think; oil/natgas.

Ukraine has a bunch of new reserves discovered about a decade ago, part of it in the Donbas, and part off-shore near Crimea.

The whole conflict in Ukraine is more over oil and some regional gripes, than about where armed forces are stationed.

So, it's an attempt to install a new Ukrainian government that will agree to new, smaller borders for Ukraine?

 

[Husky_Khan]

Belarus news is interesting. Lukashenko mentioned a “referendum” back when the war started, I thought it would involve union with Russia.

Well Belarussians have their own distinct identity and did overwhelmingly vote for Independence thirty years ago. Not saying it can't happen in the near future but just because foreign policies and other objectives and values seem in line, doesn't mean getting re-married is in the works I suppose. Plus maybe Lukashenko likes being the Russian Colonel whose in charge of his own country. Though this new uncoupling with the West could lead to interesting outcomes for the two.

It's probably vaguely similar to the Shia in Iraq and their relationship with the Iranians. The Iraqis by and large aren't Iranian puppets but there's a lot of common ground (as well as mistrust) and despite being of the same branch of Islam, the Iraqi Shia Arabs don't actually want to be ruled by Iranian Persians. They are their own entity.

 

[Bacle]

A certain someone apparently is agreeing that the invasion is not going well for Russia.

Got any other sources; because that is big news if true.

So, it's an attempt to install a new Ukrainian government that will agree to new, smaller borders for Ukraine?

Probably; I expect Putin wants to take all of the Ukrainian coast, to land lock them and removing their ability to access those reserves, or international shipping.

Also would allow linking up with Transnistria in Moldova.

 

[TheRomanSlayer]

Not to mention that if Putin hadn’t come to power back in 2000, the unheard of Union State of Russia and Belarus would have Lukashenko as its President. There’s a video titled When Belarus tried to Annex Russia on YouTube.

 

[Marduk]

Got any other sources; because that is big news if true.
Probably; I expect Putin wants to take all of the Ukrainian coast, to land lock them and removing their ability to access those reserves, or international shipping.

Also would allow linking up with Transnistria in Moldova.

This guy is the original source: