Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
The VDV were effectively destroyed and needed full force regeneration, the names and units of those who were casualties are documented by oryx tracks the armour and other open sources tracking human cost. Take Vuhledar; the town is being assaulted by the 155th Naval Infantry Brigade. What is now 'known' from communications from parent to parent, and soldiers is the unit has suffered in excess of 600 casualites and 50% equipment loss
The brigade started this engagement at full strength of 4 battalions, 1 regular infantry, 1 assault infantry, 1 artillery and 1 anti air. Russia classes them as elite and yet :
Russia is trying to cover up the decline of a once elite unit that was rendered 'combat ineffective,' UK intel says
Russia's military is "likely running a deliberate information operation" to revive the 155th brigade's reputation, the UK Ministry of Defence said.
www.businessinsider.com
Russia does have lots of trained and competent formations , the VDV will take years to regen.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 13,662
- Location
- La France
Using surplus ammunition from countries not known for their scrupulous quality control is always going to bite you in the bum. I remember reading stories from Afghanistan where the British Army was using Indian .50BMG ammunition at one point and it almost turning Browning M2s into single shot weapons. It was either seriously under pressure or had been stored poorly and degraded. Possibly both.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,219
Haven’t been many missile strikes for a while either. They’re clearly running out of equipment and it’s taking longer and longer to replace it. Meanwhile Ukraine should be getting the good stuff.
I didn't think Russia had a good military because they don't. There's no chance Ukraine can retake Crimea. It's far too valuable to the Russians and far too defensible. Ukraine simply doesn't have the man power to fight such a costly offensive skirmish while maintaining readiness across the rest of it's lines.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 16,010
- Location
- Fareham
Defensible? if Ukraine cut off the northern routes, the only way in or out is via a single bridge that crosses the sea, or by boat.
I would not call it that defensible honestly. If that bridge gets into HIMARS range it's even more of a liability.
I remain unconvinced that Ukraine will siege it though, or will even wind up getting it back in any peace deal, but I also don't think it's that important in the scheme of things to them, they have a good coast line on the Black Sea without it.
Suspect it will be a bargaining chip in any peace deal, and Ukraine would be willing to permanently lose it in return for a more lasting peace settlement, and ideally the return of the rest of Ukraine inc. Donbas and Luhansk back to them, potentially with NATO membership also being an item they trade it for.
What I find strange is Russia moving so slowly on scaling up industry towards military supply even taking into account in some cases they will have to find ways to replace or substitute manufacturing or supply dependant on Western sourced parts or maintenance, etc. it isn't like they lack the skill base to do so - though they increasingly seem to mobilise key people to the frontlines in that respect.
Anything dug in there though will be difficult to shift and the same applies somewhat in reverse in terms of Ukraine holding it should Russia attempt to invade again in the future - there is only a relatively narrow strip of land connecting it to the rest of Ukraine.
Personally I see it as a huge liability for Ukraine but also a potential weakness in the future if Russia was allowed to maintain a military presence there.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 16,010
- Location
- Fareham
I think if Ukraine pushed that far south and were able to prevent any land traffic in or out from the north, they would also be able to take the bridge out of commission.
They'd probably just station troops to prevent Russia from leaving, and in the meantime give them a massive supply headache + target practice for a lot of the military targets within Crimea itself.
As you say attacking it could be hard, but likewise, it's not as if Russia can easily break out of it either if Ukraine dig in positions and target the routes.
In this sense, I think it would play in Ukraines favour to be in that position, even if they don't invade it, they'll have the upper hand for supply and reinforcements.
And you think that Russia will agree to pay for all the damage that has been done to Ukraine?
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,230
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Were holding hostage about $300b of Russia's foreign reserves in various banks, I don't know the rules/law but I would like to think that could be given the Ukraine to help them rebuild.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 16,010
- Location
- Fareham
Russia are clearly never going to voluntarily pay anything or admit fault, they will just cite excuses or reasons that fit their narrative.
Pretty sure Ukraine rebuild plans don't really include war reparations from Russia in any form, so anything they can seize would just be a bonus.
Last edited:
*Russian Rouble Falls to 80 vs Dollar for First Time Since April 2022
*Kremlin on Stationing Nuclear Weapons in Belarus: NATO Is the One Expanding Towards Russia, so We Have to Defend Our Security
*Founder of Russia’s Wagner Group Prigozhin: Ukraine’s Forces Not Leaving Bakhmut
*Polish PM Morawiecki: I Think a Fast-Track Route for Moldova to Join EU Is Possible
*Xi: Working on an Open World
*Xi: France and China Urge International Community to Avoid Escalation of Crisis
*Xi: Call on All Countries to Respect Nuclear Non Proliferation
*Xi: Two Countries Wants International Security Architecture
*Xi, on Ukraine Crisis: Hopes Peace Talks to Restart As Soon As Possible, and a Political Solution and a Balanced, Effective and Sustainable European *Security Framework Can Be Found
*Macron: Xi Had Important Words on Ukraine
*Macron: One UN Security Member Has Violated the UN Charter and That’s Unacceptable
*Macron: Both Countries Agree That Nuclear Should Be Excluded From the Ukraine Conflict
*Macron: Russia Should Not Station Nuclear Weapons in Belarus
*Macron: European Security Architecture Is Not Possible As Long As Ukraine Is Occupied
*Macron: Human Rights Issue Still an Important Issue for France, On Human Rights It’s Better to Be Respectful Than to Lecture
*Elysée: The 1 Hour and a Half Meeting Between Macron and Xi Was ‘Frank and Constructive’
*Xi: France and China Urge International Community to Avoid Escalation of Crisis
*Xi: Call on All Countries to Respect Nuclear Non Proliferation
*Xi: Two Countries Wants International Security Architecture
*Xi, on Ukraine Crisis: Hopes Peace Talks to Restart As Soon As Possible, and a Political Solution and a Balanced, Effective and Sustainable European *Security Framework Can Be Found
*Macron: Xi Had Important Words on Ukraine
*Macron: One UN Security Member Has Violated the UN Charter and That’s Unacceptable
*Macron: Both Countries Agree That Nuclear Should Be Excluded From the Ukraine Conflict
*Macron: Russia Should Not Station Nuclear Weapons in Belarus
*Macron: European Security Architecture Is Not Possible As Long As Ukraine Is Occupied
*Macron: Human Rights Issue Still an Important Issue for France, On Human Rights It’s Better to Be Respectful Than to Lecture
*Elysée: The 1 Hour and a Half Meeting Between Macron and Xi Was ‘Frank and Constructive’
*Kremlin on Stationing Nuclear Weapons in Belarus: NATO Is the One Expanding Towards Russia, so We Have to Defend Our Security
*Founder of Russia’s Wagner Group Prigozhin: Ukraine’s Forces Not Leaving Bakhmut
*Polish PM Morawiecki: I Think a Fast-Track Route for Moldova to Join EU Is Possible
Last edited:
Make it so any peace deal ensures Russia's reparations are non-negotiable by only giving back the sanctioned funds 1:1 for any aid directed towards Ukraine and make it time-sensitive so that after a year the funds are directed to Ukraine regardless.
As of today, no one has yet used seized Russian assets to help Ukraine. Assets have been frozen sure but it's not being taken for themselves for transferred to Ukraine.
Western countries are still looking for legal options that won't hurt themselves - if countries just start taking Russian assets then every other despot run country will withdraw their assets from western countries out of fear they are next.
It's possible that Ukraine may never see Russian assets until a legal framework around reparations has been setup and Russian assets can be used to pay reparations rather than just look like random seizure of foreign assets because the western governments don't like the despots
Western countries are still looking for legal options that won't hurt themselves - if countries just start taking Russian assets then every other despot run country will withdraw their assets from western countries out of fear they are next.
It's possible that Ukraine may never see Russian assets until a legal framework around reparations has been setup and Russian assets can be used to pay reparations rather than just look like random seizure of foreign assets because the western governments don't like the despots
Last edited:
Both a Rivet Joint and Aries out today looking at the Black Sea - electronic signal gathering. Lot of chatter about Russia assembling missile carriers out there but I'm guessing the US is trying to determine rather than monitor what activity there is.
Could come into play as part of the peace talks, how much does Russia get back, how much is allocated for rebuilding Ukraine etc.. I guess it depends on how successful the spring/summer offensive is. If they push back Russia to Crimea and mostly out of the Donbas and start bombing the bridge, port and other targets in Crimea + block off the canal then Russia has an incentive to start thinking about paying for rebuilding, agreeing on some deal on Crimea/Sevastopol etc..
Russia (perhaps under a new government) isn't then necessarily actively paying funds to Ukraine (which could be seen as a humiliation domestically) but is, perhaps begrudgingly, as part of a deal, acknowledging that some portion of the confiscated Russian funds will be used for that purpose.
Last edited:
- Status