[axiosgunnar]

> I see Russia winning on all fronts tbh.

I do not, and anyone else not trying to be contrarian and edgy on the back's of a humanitarian catastrophe does not either. Russia's goal was a blitzkrieg surprise win, measured in hours, taking over the capital and the government, before the West could even muster up sanctions. They have failed abysmally at that, and capturing a few towns in Eastern Ukraine (just a little bit more than they already had captured since 2014) is Putin's attempt to have something in his hands to present as a victory and hope not to get couped to death (a fate all warmongers rightfully deserve).

Russia most certainly isn't winning.

[didericis]

They seem to have lost their initial short term objectives, and the fog of war is real/I can’t tell how good or bad they’re currently doing, but I think regardless of their competency or resolve it’s foolish to underestimate a China-Russia coalition’s resiliency long term, if only due to their much more totalitarian hold over their populace. The lack of easy avenues for a change in leadership even if extremely disastrous for most Russians is a significant difference.

That said, I think there are rumblings of regime change in China. The housing market crash and extreme lockdowns seem to have a lot of people upset.

Seems like we’re living through interesting times, unfortunately… I’m probably delusional, but I’m somewhat optimistic that people will be better off once the dust settles. Depends on how rough it gets and whether we can manage a smooth landing.

[YZF]

There's definitely fog of war but the front lines have barely moved despite Russia bringing all its might to bear. We saw the images of those demolished Russian forces at that ill fated river crossing. We keep seeing evidence of Russia suffering continuous losses.

What we don't see much of is the Ukrainian side's losses. Their morale and will seem extremely high though.

The Ukrainians have a numerical advantage over the mobilized Russian army. They have an advantage as a defender and they have a double advantage because they are defending their families and homes. The Russians don't know what they're fighting for and why they're even there.

The Ukrainians are backed by the west (though maybe not enough) with potential access to weaponry that can tip the balance. They appear to generally be applying better tactics vs. the Russians brute force and level everything to the ground approach. So really the only thing stopping them from pushing the Russians out right now is access to more and better weapons (which might be improving in the coming weeks with the new US aid package).

Re: China I think they're looking at this and recalculating. Taiwan is probably not happening. Their "strategic" partner that's supposed to be a super power turned out to be full of hot air. Western weapon superiority is proven again. They want to win economically, they don't like instability. And sure, just like anywhere else, totalitarian regimes don't last for ever.

Another factor is that other countries are looking at this and also reaching the conclusion that the western hegemony that appears to maybe be not doing so great actually is still doing pretty well.

All that said, it's probably going to get worse before it gets better. This is just so stupid.

[didericis]

Agree 1000% about the stupid part, the pain being caused right now is so tragic and unnecessary. And I hope you’re right about the rest/think you probably are, but its important not to get too arrogant about our position given the stakes.

[lettergram]

> do not, and anyone else not trying to be contrarian and edgy on the back's of a humanitarian catastrophe does not either. Russia's goal was a blitzkrieg surprise win, measured in hours, taking over the capital and the government, before the West could even muster up sanctions.

Where does that assumption come from? No Russian source has ever said that. The only sources I’ve seen were the US propaganda arm. Putin said that they were now in a defensive war with the west (his words, not mine). I don’t think they expected that to be over any time soon.

But just for fun let’s assume you’re correct. Their objective is to conquer Ukraine..?

It still doesn’t change the fact Ukraine isn’t winning. They’ve lost territory, most of the military assets, and the territory they’ve lost thus far is their most productive (industry and agriculture is based around the coast). By no measure is that trending toward victory.

Now my position on this — Recall, Ukraine had one of the largest standing armies prior to this war. Order of magnitude more prepared than Iraq in the 90s or 2000s. With better equipment, heavily entrenched and much larger by land mass.

I don’t think there’s any way that Russia expected to conquer Ukraine with 50k troops (1/5 the size of Ukraine’s standing army) in 90 days. But I also don’t think Ukraine is the only theater of battle. The real war is the war of logistics and in that, Russia is far better prepared and capable.

[greedo]

To say your "facts" are in error is to say water is wet.

Russian started the war with roughly 100 BTGs. These have roughly 1k troops when fully equipped (as you would expect before the start of hostilities). They've added another 10-15 BTGs to replace the 45 or so that have been attritted by Ukrainian forces. So no, they didn't expect to conquer Ukraine with 50K troops, but closer to twice that.

RuAF also tried to decapitate Ukraine by seizing Hostomel with airborne troops, and then rushing Kiev with troops located very closely in Belarus. You don't commit airborne troops like this when you don't have a)strategic surprise, b) tactical surprise, c) air supremacy. Russia expected a quick coup de main, and when the VdV got wrecked in Hostomel, they lost the war.

Since the invasion in February, Ukraine has recovered most of the territory they lost in the north. In the south, the RuAF has made minimal gains past the lines of the 2014 conflict.

You believe that Ukraine has lost most of their military assets? They currently have more tanks than when the war started, due to how many they've captured from Russia. Not to mention what has been contributed by NATO (Poland/Czechia etc.). They still have a well functioning and effective air force that has prevented the Russian air force from exerting control over the battlefield. They even managed to sink the flagship of the Black Sea Fleet.

Russia has lost over 30k dead, and roughly 3x that as WIA. Over 1000 tanks. Over 350 aircraft (counting helicopters). Thousands of BMPs, MTLBs, BMDs, artillery, trucks, all destroyed. The RuAF has culminated.

All Russia has achieved is shelling indiscriminately. They haven't shown the ability to hold terrain, to resupply their troops, to prevent the Ukrainians from doing anything they want. They couldn't even reduce Mariupol's garrison for three months.

Russia's military, outside of it's nukes is a Potemkin affair.

[axiosgunnar]

> Russia's military, outside of it's nukes is a Potemkin affair.

Let‘s hope that its nukes are a Potemkin affair as well.

[lljk_kennedy]

Here's your source on a "Russian Blitzkrieg" being the opinion of the Russian political classes, and an ex-Army Colonel trying to pour water on it - _before_ the war started.

About the author: Mikhail Mikhailovich Khodarenok - ex-head of the group of the 1st direction of the 1st directorate of the Main Operational Directorate of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, Colonel

https://nvo-ng-ru.translate.goog/realty/2022-02-03/3_1175_do...