Russia invades Ukraine

[burn_this_city]

Things are looking a bit rough around Severodonetsk for Ukraine at the moment.
Looks like a couple major EU countries are purposefully providing too little too late. Russia has thrown everything they have at these sectors and are slowly grinding down the UAF.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1529459163029553160

[burn_this_city]

Finnish PM Sanna Marin is in Kyiv and toured Bucha, Irpin today. No sign of the German and French leaders who at this point seem to want Russia to win or save face.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1529792967283814401

[Sliver]

That is one primo Prime Minister. Holy fata.

[burn_this_city]

Would hate to border Russia and see what she's seeing.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1529745576249769984

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Things are looking a bit rough around Severodonetsk for Ukraine at the moment.
Looks like a couple major EU countries are purposefully providing too little too late. Russia has thrown everything they have at these sectors and are slowly grinding down the UAF.

Definitely not looking good for the UA army now, no matter how hard Reddit or Western news tries to spin it. Fact is, a lot of soldier's simply don't have the necessary equipment they need to keep pushing. It's all over the various Kharkiv Telegram chats how soldiers are eager to keep liberating villages in that region, yet don't have the weapons and equipment they need to continue onward, and instead are sitting back as the Russians slowly but surely dig in and take back settlements. Lots of UA soldiers getting frustrated at the lack of preparedness on their end.

Lots of big talk of the land-lease bill and other big aid supposedly coming in, but soldiers aren't seeing it quite yet at the scale they need. Here's hoping it comes sooner than later, as the Russians have altered their tactics recently and aren't goofing around anymore. Hopefully Ukraine can hold out a bit longer until more aid arrives, along with whatever land-lease is supposed to do (aka. turn the tide), but it's getting brutal at this point.

[opendoor]

Yeah, Russia completely bungled the start of the war, but ultimately they're still a stronger force and if they direct all their energy into one region (particularly one that's easy to maintain supply routes to) they're going to continue to gain ground. Western weapons will certainly help, but other than the tanks Poland sent, it doesn't seem like any tanks, planes, or larger missiles are going to be sent. And the supply of Javelins and Stinger missiles is dwindling, so they're not likely to get many more of those than they already have. Hopefully the US artillery they get can help turn the tide.

[blankall]

Severodonetsk was under de facto Russian control before this war and has been since 2014. The Ukrainians had been at war in this area for the last 10 years, in a stalemate. If Russia is "defending" this area, it's hardly a victory for them and anything but would be a massive loss.

[Monahammer]

The advances in the Ukrainian east are sad but not unexpected. As others have mentioned, Russia should frankly already have captured these areas but bungled the get go so bad that they are just getting there now.

The most worrisome thing on the Radar right now, IMO, for the west is the grain shipping situation. It seems to be getting extremely perilous. Russia is saying they will blockade the black sea unless sanctions are reduced, US is trying to get Ukraine to give up eastern pieces (kissinger mentioned this publicly but seems like it was already going on behind the scenes) to broker at least temporary stop to fighting and reduce sanctions to allow grain, Ukraine is saying absolutely not, and European countries are starting to ask the US to figure out how to get them grain through those ports as alarm bells have started to ring globally for a massive food crisis. Meanwhile Turkey is piping up saying that they will "join" another naval power in ensuring the blockade is ended...

The only way the blockade ends without Ukraine giving up land are NATO ships blasting Russian ones in the black sea. China is trying to avoid this by arguing for a "green zone" shipping lane, but that doesn't seem to be going seriously yet. The other potential grain route is by train through Belarus,

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by blankall

Severodonetsk was under de facto Russian control before this war and has been since 2014. The Ukrainians had been at war in this area for the last 10 years, in a stalemate. If Russia is "defending" this area, it's hardly a victory for them and anything but would be a massive loss.

Huh? Severdonetsk was only under separatist control for about 2 months in 2014. Since then it has been under Ukrainian government control and at the start of the war was about 30-40km behind the front line.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by opendoor

Huh? Severdonetsk was only under separatist control for about 2 months in 2014. Since then it has been under Ukrainian government control and at the start of the war was about 30-40km behind the front line.

Thank you for the correction My understanding was that Russia had de facto control of Luhansk and all of its suburbs including Severdonetsk, but Severdonetsk actually became the administrative capital of the Ukrainian government in the region. After Luhansk fell.

Edit: Either way this is not very impressive from the Russian forces. This is literally a small city down the road from the Luhansk and they are struggling to gain control of this city, after 13 weeks of war.

[burn_this_city]

This should help.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1529939191378984988

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Sliver

That is one primo Prime Minister. Holy fata.

[burn_this_city]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1530067008246751233

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

This should help.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1529939191378984988

“Let’s wait until the end of May to send them, just to see what happens.”

[FlameOn]

MOD and map updates. Heavy fighting around Severodonetsk for the past few days with the city now surrounded on three sides by Russian forces and only the last link across the river to Lysychansk under Ukrainian control. Reportedly the amount of artillery the Ukrainians have in the area is far less than what Russians have available.

Russians are apparently also starting to have equipment shortages with units starting to receive ancient 50 year old T-62 tanks as replacements for tanks destroyed. These will have even less protection than the metal coffins that the more recent T-72s most of the Russian units are fielding. Hopefully Russians run out of equipment soon.

No other advances in the north or south.

https://twitter.com/user/status/1530055732271452161

https://twitter.com/user/status/1529964715685728256

Larger detailed map from Wikipedia

Spoiler!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_R...ion_of_Ukraine

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

“Let’s wait until the end of May to send them, just to see what happens.”

Even systems that are combat ready need time to get prepped for transport, that's not counting all the supplies, ammo, and parts that need to go with them. Once you fly them over the Ukrainians aren't going to get trained on them for another month at least. You're gonna be lucky to get these things combat ready by mid July.

[opendoor]

It sounds like the US is still concerned with escalation if they provide weapons that Ukraine could use to directly attack Russia. And they're worried about depleting their own supply, which might explain the delays with providing MLRS:

The Biden administration waivered for weeks, however, on whether to send the systems, amid concerns raised within the National Security Council that Ukraine could use the systems to carry out offensive attacks inside Russia, officials said.

The issue was at the top of the agenda at last week's two meetings at the White House where deputy Cabinet members convened to discuss national security policy, officials said. At the heart of the matter was the same concern the administration has grappled with since the start of the war-- whether sending increasingly heavy weaponry to Ukraine will be viewed by Russia as a provocation that could trigger some kind of retaliation against the US.

One major hang-up, the sources said, had been the rocket systems' extensive range. The MLRS and its lighter-weight version, the HIMARS, can launch as far as 300km, or 186 miles, depending on the type of munition. They are fired from a mobile vehicle at land-based targets, which would allow the Ukrainians to more easily strike targets inside Russia.

One workaround could be to provide Ukraine with shorter-range rocket systems, officials said, which is also under consideration. It would not take too long to train the Ukrainians on any of the rocket launcher systems, officials told CNN — likely about two weeks, they said.

Every drawdown from existing inventories involves a review of its potential effect on US military readiness. With the previous drawdowns, the risk has been "relatively low," said Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley on Monday. The military is watching "very, very carefully" to make sure the stockpiles don't drop below levels that create a greater risk, he added.

The concern grows significantly with more capable, more expensive systems of which the US does not have as large a supply, the sources said.

Pentagon officials met with the CEO of Lockheed Martin last week to discuss supply and ramping up production of the MLRS, one source familiar with the meeting told CNN. The meeting was led by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Bill LaPlante.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/26/p...lrs/index.html

[Itse]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Even systems that are combat ready need time to get prepped for transport, that's not counting all the supplies, ammo, and parts that need to go with them. Once you fly them over the Ukrainians aren't going to get trained on them for another month at least. You're gonna be lucky to get these things combat ready by mid July.

This. It's why the first weapons that got sent to Ukraine was either stuff UA was already familiar with (Warsaw pact stuff), or easy-to-use stuff that doesn't require a long logistics chain to function (shoulder fired rockets/missiles, drones etc.)

It's also more than just training people to use them, you also need someone to repair these things, otherwise they'd be out of commission so quick there'd be no point in sending them in the first place.

That's why Perun's (that youtuber I keep linking to) very credible (to my ears) analysis was that Russia should enjoy a logistical advantage at about this point in the war, as they have such a massive stockpile of hardware sitting in storage that's "ready to use" on a relatively short notice. They'll have trouble replacing the high-end systems (helicopters and planes for example), and trained personnel, but they have (on paper) thousands and thousands of old tanks for example. If even a portion of them are usable, Russia can exhaust Ukrainian anti-tank capabilities with just sheer volume. Same with things like artillery and other basic stuff like non-advanced ammunition. Quality of equipment and motivation of personnel does matter, but very few things can stand up to sheer numbers of concentrated force, at least on the short term.

That's why Russia (rather slowly) advancing on one smallish border town isn't much of an achievement. It's really the bare minimum they should be able to do with the army they have.

The US also has massive stockpiles of stuff (enough tanks to replace all the losses on both sides many times over for example), but it's not stuff Ukraine can use right away, and most of it is on a different continent.

If the war goes long (which looks likely right now), over time we'll likely see Ukraine using more and more NATO equipment.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Itse

This. It's why the first weapons that got sent to Ukraine was either stuff UA was already familiar with (Warsaw pact stuff), or easy-to-use stuff that doesn't require a long logistics chain to function (shoulder fired rockets/missiles, drones etc.)

It's also more than just training people to use them, you also need someone to repair these things, otherwise they'd be out of commission so quick there'd be no point in sending them in the first place.

That's why Perun's (that youtuber I keep linking to) very credible (to my ears) analysis was that Russia should enjoy a logistical advantage at about this point in the war, as they have such a massive stockpile of hardware sitting in storage that's "ready to use" on a relatively short notice. They'll have trouble replacing the high-end systems (helicopters and planes for example), and trained personnel, but they have (on paper) thousands and thousands of old tanks for example. If even a portion of them are usable, Russia can exhaust Ukrainian anti-tank capabilities with just sheer volume. Same with things like artillery and other basic stuff like non-advanced ammunition.

The US also has massive stockpiles of stuff (enough tanks to replace all the losses on both sides many times over for example), but it's not stuff Ukraine can use right away, and most of it is in on a different continent.

If the war goes long (which looks likely right now), over time we'll likely see Ukraine using more and more NATO equipment.

Throwing wave after wave of men and equipment at an enemy has worked in the past.

And since Russians don't care about personnel losses, this is a fool proof plan.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Throwing wave after wave of men and equipment at an enemy has worked in the past.

And since Russians don't care about personnel losses, this is a fool proof plan.

The only kind of plan the Russian military can apparently pull off.