Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Uther said:
Interesting that some people think Prighozin is on a bit of a charm offensive and wants to be the next Russian leader. Personally I think he's more likely to end up dead.
Click to expand...
It's obvious and he doesn't hide his ambitions.

One of them will end up dead for sure, to the victor the spoils.

The question is if Prighozin wins and gets Putins job will he firght on of stop the war?
 
Grim5 said:
The Ivan Khurs has made an appearance, after being hit by a drone boat, it disappeared for a while and now it's been spotted heading for Sevastopol, it's being towed and appears to be on fire/smoking - hard to tell from this footage, russian ships are known to smoke anyway

Click to expand...
In all fairness to the pro-Kremlin war correspondents, Russian ships usually have black smoke billowing out of them and accompanied by a tag, so its bit hard to tell the difference if this is damage or a usual sea voyage. ;)
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
His Wagner group took Bakhmut and won a victory for Russia, I'd say that makes him rather popular
Click to expand...
But he hasn't taken Bakhmut fully, Ukraine still have a presence

He claims he has to make it look good and now he turns it over to Russian troops then tells the world the Russians lost it again further down the line.

Whats he does is calculated. He has a bigger game plan on the go here.
 
Grim5 said:
Ukrainian suicide drone boats have hit the Russian ship Ivan Khurs

It doesn't sound like the damage is enough to sink it but the ship's current whereabouts is unknown

Click to expand...
Reports are its taken on water, if true and it sinks then this is huge.

Turns out that ship is a radar ship that detects all incoming missiles etc and passes it on to the other ships to shoot them down.

if this sinks it could be a huge blow to their defences.
 
I would expect warships to be designed in a way that they can take a torpedo hit and isolate the damaged area so as to keep the ship from sinking. The location of the impact should at least effect maneuverability / propulsion.

This is a Russian naval ship though, so it could also just be built and /or maintained terribly and already be at the bottom of the sea after a single hit.
 
It's all speculations however Ukraine should be given the tools to completely wipe out all of Russians ships and also air defence. Breaking air defence will allow for stuff like the Bayraktars to return will be carnage.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
This is so on point. Unless your a sad little xenophobe when you actually meet and work with people from all over the world you realise we are all the same.
Poxy lines on maps and weak minded individuals hold us back so much.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately poxy lines on maps are necessary to keep poxy ***** like Putin behind them.
 
Mercenary Keyboard Warrior said:
Thats kind of my point...
if we could over time get away from the lines we would likely do away with the likes of Putin.
We could certainly start with the properly westernised nations (like the original EU members)
Click to expand...
I think you might need a new species for that to happen, Empires fall Because humans aren't all the same culturally and short of genocide retain their identity even after being absorbed by larger cultures.

It's a bit like saying we'll solve the housing problems if we just got over locks and doors and people just lived where ever they liked.
 
bris said:
But he hasn't taken Bakhmut fully, Ukraine still have a presence

He claims he has to make it look good and now he turns it over to Russian troops then tells the world the Russians lost it again further down the line.

Whats he does is calculated. He has a bigger game plan on the go here.
Click to expand...

No man, they don't still have a presence, that's just something they've said to make it not look like a loss. For all intents and purposes Russia fully controls Bankhmut. I think people need to think critically about what they're actually posting here, you know both sides use propaganda, right?

I read Russia had 5x as many losses as Ukraine in Bakhmut, that would also seem wildly unrealistic. If they were to say they had 80% of the losses then I could believe that, but 20%? Maybe if it were Royal Marines fighting against the Russian regulars.

I'd also like to suggest it was strategically stupid to use so many Ukrainian resources fighting over Bakhmut that could have been better utilised. I'm sure that would've been against all the advice given.
 
Last edited:
Roar87 said:
No man, they don't still have a presence, that's just something they've said to make it not look like a loss. For all intents and purposes Russia fully controls Bankhmut. I think people need to think critically about what they're actually posting here, you know both sides use propaganda, right?

I read Russia had 5x as many losses as Ukraine in Bakhmut, that would also seem wildly unrealistic. If they were to say they had 80% of the losses then I could believe that, but 20%? Maybe if it were Royal Marines fighting against the Taliban.
Click to expand...

Assaulting defended positions of a near peer force almost always has much higher losses for the attacker. You are also talking a mostly private military force bulked out with prisoners against more regular forces.
 
Roar87 said:
No man, they don't still have a presence, that's just something they've said to make it not look like a loss. For all intents and purposes Russia fully controls Bankhmut. I think people need to think critically about what they're actually posting here, you know both sides use propaganda, right?

I read Russia had 5x as many losses as Ukraine in Bakhmut, that would also seem wildly unrealistic. If they were to say they had 80% of the losses then I could believe that, but 20%? Maybe if it were Royal Marines fighting against the Russian regulars.

I'd also like to suggest it was strategically stupid to use so many Ukrainian resources fighting over Bakhmut that could have been better utilised. I'm sure that would've been against all the advice given.
Click to expand...

No chance defending is much easier than attacking. How many perished trying to get up the beaches of Normandy compared to the Germans sitting behind their machine guns do you think?
Plus the Russians from all accounts were all infantry no support really.

You may like to suggest. and some may agree with you. It seemed a pretty handy way to bleed Russia of a lot of their fodder, plus it seemed to become their only goal from the winter campaign. They didn't get very far.
I would say it suited Ukraine a lot to have Russia fixated on a bad objective and not looking elsewhere whilst Ukraine continued to be tooled up for the Spring/Summer offensive.
 
Not sure they quite control all of Bakhmut yet anyhow - as of a few hours ago Ukrainian artillery was still working against positions between 0.5 and 1km into the city - likely covering a withdrawal though.
 
Roar87 said:
No man, they don't still have a presence, that's just something they've said to make it not look like a loss. For all intents and purposes Russia fully controls Bankhmut. I think people need to think critically about what they're actually posting here, you know both sides use propaganda, right?

I read Russia had 5x as many losses as Ukraine in Bakhmut, that would also seem wildly unrealistic. If they were to say they had 80% of the losses then I could believe that, but 20%? Maybe if it were Royal Marines fighting against the Russian regulars.

I'd also like to suggest it was strategically stupid to use so many Ukrainian resources fighting over Bakhmut that could have been better utilised. I'm sure that would've been against all the advice given.
Click to expand...

So now you are a sofa 4 star questioning Ukraine tactics/planning? Planning I'm sure they are getting help with from her allies. This isn't World of Tanks Roar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom