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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mr Badger said:
I seem to recall this coming up on QI. The average age of the Home Guard in WWII was something like 35 and it had over a million members, peaking at around 1.5 million.
Click to expand...
Mean or median? If it was the "average" if you have a 55 year-old and a 15-year-old, you have an "average" of 35. But neither of them is eligible for the main army.
 
Harlequin said:
The sheer numbers of Causalities dont add up to `partial deployment` of units. The observed number - from Russia themselves was 170 BTG (each around 1000 soldiers) at the start of 2022 for the entire Amry, with 110 deployed to Ukraine. So on paper the force was 170,000>190,000 total personal from all branches in voled

books.google.co.uk

The Military Balance 2022

Published each year since 1959, The Military Balance is an indispensable reference to the capabilities of armed forces across the globe. It is used by academia, the media, armed forces, the private sector and government. It is an open-source assessment of the military forces and equipment...
books.google.co.uk

So with 110BTG`s available at the start (numbers from RUSI and other sources) , these were thrown into the meat grinder and casualty rates were up to 900 a day - thats a BTG per day in casualities. As Perun said last year, Russia started a force regeneration 6 months afetr the invasion (emptying prisons for Wagnar and the 300,000 called up). 5 months on and another force regeneration , another 200,000 being called up (possibly 500,000), but given the short fall first time around, Russia wont get the men needed to force regen.
Click to expand...

Sigh... there was large amounts of mobilisation, essentially conscription, leading up to the invasion - people seem to have quickly forgotten the deployments to Belarus for "training", the scenes of the newly mobilised being gathered in eastern provinces to be sent to Ukraine, etc. those numbers include national guard and security forces not from the main armed forces as well as other irregulars - there is some argument as to how the likes of the Chechen forces, etc. factor in those numbers.

I have no idea how so many commentators have forgotten all the accounts from the early days of the war like new recruits running away from the frontlines after their commanders got killed and having no idea what to do (hanging out in abandoned buildings with no supplies wanting to go home) and so on.
 
bingham67 said:
Click to expand...

Even if Russia had been prepared for it, which it seems not, I don't think there has been the prolonged hard freeze this year and especially not last, which would have enabled mass armour use - the winter has been late and sporadic.

Not sure what has happened to the forces Russia was gathering/training near Nizhny Novgorod seemingly for a winter offensive, it all seems to have gone quiet - I suspect they ended up being drip fed in to replace losses to shore up current lines with the sheer scale of daily losses. (EDIT: Looks like 3AC were expended August to October trying to replace losses in the north, the rest have been sent to the eastern front over the last few months).

This is the problem with the West dallying, if Russia has to keep expending forces before they can reorganise and so on the back foot the better the chance of forcing them out, give them time to grow into the war it will make any possible win harder.
 
Last edited:
Advisor to Zelensky says Kyiv is willing to negotiate a peaceful settlement for Crimea with Russia but, Kyiv will only engage in negotiations once it's army has pushed the Russians back out of the Kherson and zaporizhia regions and into the Crimean peninsula to restore the pre February 2022 border.




To me at least it sounds like Ukraine is willing to let Russia have Crimea but for that Ukraine wants the pre February 2022 borders back
 
Last edited:
"NATO is developing a multi-year programme of support for Ukraine, — the Deputy Chairman of the National Security Committee Yehor Chernev

It is about the fastest possible transition to NATO standards and principles, so that Ukraine becomes compatible with its partners and is ready to join the Alliance de facto.

After that, it will be much easier to secure de jure membership. Ukraine is already using Western weapons, and we are getting closer to Alliance standards. Accordingly, this programme is designed to speed up our accession.

The meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission is a testament to the victory of diplomacy, including Ukrainian diplomacy."
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
To me at least it sounds like Ukraine is willing to let Russia have Crimea but for that Ukraine wants the pre February 2022 borders back
Click to expand...

Possibly, I'm not sure I'd go that far if they get to that point having forced Russia back to pre-2022 borders though.

Discussing the future could equate to some sort of joint sovereignty deal, there are a lot of Russians and/or Russian-identifying Ukranians in Sevastopol for example, perhaps they'd leave that under Russian control. Maybe they'd want to demilitarise the place etc..
 
Leaving Russia the port facilities in Sevastopol, etc. would be a major security concern for the future, but on the other hand taking Crimea opposed even against a defeated Russia would be hugely costly to the forces required to secure the rest of Ukraine. I don't like the principle of it but the practical side might force a compromise.
 
Roar87 said:
Crimea is Russian now, there's no retaking that. People talking about retaking Crimea are the same idiots who spoke about a no-fly zone and are fundamentally lacking any knowledge of what they're speaking about.
Click to expand...

I disagree so I guess that makes me an idiot.

I think militarily it will be hard to take back but not impossible and internationally it's still recognised as Ukrainian. Where I guess I have some element of agreement with you on is there could be issues with the population wanting to remain Russian, partly because many Ukrainians have fled and partly because Russia has moved many Russians into Crimea and also because even the Ukrainans that have been living there since Russia took it over might now have more of a pro-Russian view since they've been living under Russian propaganda for so long.

I'm not sure what would happen if Ukraine took it back by force but then found the majority living there wanted to remain part of Russia.
 
Roar87 said:
Crimea is Russian now, there's no retaking that.
Click to expand...

Didn't Russia claim other parts of Ukraine were "Russia now" before Ukraine launched a counter-offensive and took some of those parts back?

The remaining land that Russia has taken by force is only "Russia now" because no one has taken it back from them by force...yet.

Prior to Russia exposing its military as far less effective than the world thought it was, your smug-certainty would have seemed logical, although still anoying.

However, the world has witnessed Russia's performance (or rather lack thereof) in battle over the last year, so your certainty in this matter is just silly now.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom