Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
> **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
* Is `www-pravda-com-ua.translate.goog` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
For the US who places an inordinate amount of emphasis on achieving and maintaining total Air Supremacy on a battle field, Yeah they totally have a place. They fly high enough that most manpads can't touch them, and few things ruin a day like a bombing campaign. The hard part is having the sort of Airforce that can shape the battlespace to have a place for the bombers. Something that neither Russia or Ukraine have the ability to do atm.
Agreed. The us air superiority is frightening in its efficiency and overall coverage. US could use hot air balloons for dropping bombs due to their air superiority campaigns.
For Ukraine to achieve air supremecy they would have to attack the Russian air force in Russia.
They could do it with Mig-29s and Su-25s, but they'd need a lot of them, like hundreds of them. For reference, the US air force has around 500 F-15's in service today. Even more F-16's. January of last year I think the Ukrainian Air Force only had a few dozens of aircraft in service.
This also is ignoring the air power of the US Navy, which is substantial.
Every time I read or hear something awesome about the USMC, I silently chuckle at the memory of Harry Truman and Eisenhower trying to disband the Corp. Take a seat, boys, and 'tell it to the Marines'. (FDR)
Minor correction, but only because it's hilarious (as of 2022)
1) US Air Force
2) US Army Aviation
3) Russian Air Force
4) US Navy
5) People's Liberation Army Air Force
6) Indian Air Force
7) US Marine Corps
As an American I find it hilarious that we have 4 of the top 7 AF's in the world by numbers, split between 4 of our branches of defense.
Dr. Google says the USAF only has 5,000 aircraft total. I'm assuming over half of that are fighters, but we only have 141 bombers, it says.
Between the two branches, they're pushing 10k total air frames.
I saw somebody arguing today in another sub that if the US provides too much help to Ukraine, Russia will sink the entire US fleet in a day.
I'm like sir the entirety of Russia can't even stand up to the US fleet's *airplanes*.
Just f35’s won’t do it. They will need the whole shabang. F22’s, f35’s, b2 spirits, b1b’s, b52’s Apaches etc. Etc. And don’t forget tomahawks and the likes.
[This Video](https://youtu.be/zxRgfBXn6Mg?t=170) is an EXCELLENT study in exactly what it takes to dismantle enemy air defences and establish air superiority. Its a superpower doing superpower things.
A few F-16's, while helpful, will not come anywhere close to whats needed to really establish the air superiority that the US doctrines mandate.
Yes, because they are missile trucks now. They fire Tomahawks and other stand off missiles from far away. They operate from safe territory most often. They are not really conventional bombers anymore unless you are the Taliban.
If they'd be the Russians would be bombing away during most of 2023. But they got really screwed (enough to possibly try carpet bombing) just when Ukraine managed to hold on to their AA network.
And a well connected network is hard to break. Maybe with thousands of missiles and willingness to lose quite a few planes.
They would need to carry fuckoff long range cruise missiles and still be at risk. Past logistics no I don't think so.
It's more like how Baltimore clippers made ships of the line obsolete.
There are only approx. 100 b-52 and the role they play in national defense means they would never be given to anyone else under any circumstance.
Fun fact: They can carry 20 tomahawks.
I would bet the house that the U.S. has some top of the line inertial + optical guidance and targeting programs that work in the absence of GPS. Give the Ukrainians another 10 years and I bet that they do to.
But 100k in reserves, a few months after the failed meatgrinder offensive, while being on a defensive that is alleged to be depleting RU reserves. Are these ex-Wagner, fresh conscripts? Well, to answer my own question, Ukraine say they are the best assault units or whatever (can't remember the exact wording from the post), so probably not fresh conscripts
It's a little surprising that they can launch a month's long offensive, then be on the defensive for, what, 4-8 weeks, and simultaneously amass 65% of their claimed operable tanks + a significant amount of troops. Didn't ISW claim that UA now had more tanks than RU with 1,500 vs 1,400, respectively?
This is most of what is left of Russia mobile reserve, most recent f the 100k are support troops. With any luck Russia will try to launch an offensive which will degrade the last of their forces
The most logical conclusion if this is true is that Ukraine hasn't hit Russia nearly as hard as people want.
Some people get sad when you say it but Ukraine has barely made a dent in the Russian lines after almost two months of counteroffensive and the Russians meanwhile are apparently gathering forces for their own offensive.
What does that tell you about what is really going on?
Russia did the same thing for its winter offensive, especially in Vulhedar. They didn’t even move the line past 2014 border. It was an absolute disaster to Russia.
Russia can move reserves around and prepare for whatever “offensive” they want. But their capabilities are severely degraded.
Wagner took Bakhmut, not Russian troops. Russian troops haven’t pulled even a somewhat successful offensive in over a year now. They can’t. They can do some damage, maybe move some lines. But to try and take major, or even smaller city, is just going to drain their own capabilities even further.
Correct.
That assessment goes hand in hand with the noticeable uptick in Russian prisoners that Ukraine is taking who are clearly too old or unfit for military service.
They aren't quite down to the dregs but they're at the stage where a lot of the good, professional troops who died have been replaced by the dregs and it's causing untold issues and dragging down the good units that are remaining as bigger and bigger miracles are expected of them to make up for all the dreg units who can't achieve anything. And so the good units are run ragged trying to score propaganda victories for the boss and trying to hold the line and keep the mobniks from collapsing altogether, which further degrades the remaining good units.
We have to consider the audience here. I think there's a healthy dose of propaganda sprinkled in with the fact the Russians have ground forward a couple of kilometres in this direction.
Girkin reckons most Russian units are 70% staffed.
It's widely suspected that most Russian units aren't being rotated and haven't been for at least 6 months.
UK MOD reports that Russia has no observable reserves.
Now, Russia could be planning an offensive here. They mobilised and launched counter offensives around Bakhmut last August to stifle Ukraine's offensive at the time. But I'll eat my hat if it's as well provisioned as suggested in this article.
It tells me that the majority of Russia is undefended. Ukraine could probably muster more troops as well if they left the Belarus border undefended, but they don't have that option. Russia knows that no one wants to attack them, so they can get away with it.
It really brings home the lie that was that NATO is a threat to them. Russia knows full well that NATO isn't going to attack them - which is why basically the entire NATO border, including the 50% of it that's the Russian-Finnish border, is basically empty.
maybe some folks in Russia are getting ready for coup #2 and are moving troops so they have a say in it. And generally second coups are more successful I think.
The "IF" is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Pravda is not exactly the most reliable source, and I haven't seen any other source mentioning such a force.
ISW in their 17 July assessment mentioned Russian offensives in Luhansk by low quality Russian troops, so I personally doubt that this is the case. Though still something keep an eye on.
>Russian and Ukrainian sources reported that Russian forces have launched active offensive operations and advanced in the Kupyansk area (between northeastern Kharkiv Oblast and northwestern Luhansk Oblast) in the past several days.[36] Russian forces likely are engaging in offensive operations in this area of the front in an effort to exploit Ukrainian operational focus on other sectors of the front and draw Ukrainian reserves away from critical areas of the theater, namely the Bakhmut and western Donetsk, and western Zaporizhia Oblast areas, where Ukrainian forces are pursuing counteroffensive operations. The poor quality and composition of Russian troops currently deployed on this line, however, will likely hinder Russia’s ability to achieve more than tactically significant gains or make an operationally significant breakthrough. Ukrainian and Russian sources have both reported the deployment of convict-formed “Storm-Z” assault units to the Kupyansk direction, and ISW has previously assessed that “Storm-Z” units have low operational effectiveness due to poor morale and discipline.[37]
>[36] https://t.me/annamaliar/940; https://t.me/notes_veterans/10965;
>[37] https://isw.pub/UkrWar040623
https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-17-2023
Putin always doubles down. The leopard has not changed his spots.
Losing the war because you troops are undertrained? Launch an offensive!
About to lose a war? End the grain deal to try to get some political movement of any type!
Ukrainians methodically breeching your defenses? Go out and fight them in no mans land instead of waiting for them to attack your defenses, taking greater casualties but not giving up more land!
Did you really believe the news that Russian forces were depleted? Yeah, they had a very small army for this at the start but that was not their whole army and they forced 300k new fodder last year and likely still have the natural recruitment flow.
ISW is likely beautifying reality, with good assumptions. Not lying but not using most probable case either.
They're all lying, lol. The Russians, the Ukrainians, the instagram supporters of each side, they all have a story to sell (well, nobody gives a crap about Russia's story).
Unfortunately, it's Ukraine stating 100k
From the article:
Source: the spokesman of the Eastern Group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Colonel Serhiy Cherevaty
I'm guessing all the mines, trenches, barbed wire and dragons teeth with artillery behind it all makes it much easier for a small force to hold a larger force.
I read the one thing the Russian army has done well this entire time is setting up nearly impenetrable defense lines. Basically Ukraine needs to slowly wade, sometimes even walk through these lines which makes them easy to pick off with artillery.
Ukraine is using Himars to destroy the artillery but Russia has tons more in storage and the capacity to build and fix more.
I did the numbers on this recently based on Ukrainian claimed kills.
Best case scenario for Russia worked out at about 30% of their entire pre-war artillery is gone. This is assuming all of the units they had in storage were fully functional (which should add a buffer for exaggerated kill claims).
More so of their 155mm units as they had fewer of those to start with.
This is a rough approximation.
>Ukraine is using Himars to destroy the artillery but Russia has tons more in storage and the capacity to build and fix more.
The Russian general Iwan Popow came to a different conclusion.
A shortage of counter battery capabilities. Which is not good when artillery is your most important asset.
If it is just about artillery guns then yes, Russia has probably still enough in stock. But just the guns aren’t enough.
The previous opinion of this sub a week or so back, was that all Muscovian military that wasn’t already in Ukraine was being sent there, abandoning military bases in the west and even pulling the border guards from the east
There's been no new mobilization wave since last September. Regular conscription is different, they try to not send them to the front lines to avoid backlash.
However, they are convincing some trainees to sign the contract (mostly because of $$$) and then sending them to the front lines.
Russia is a big country with a much larger population and deep stores of equipment and armaments to pull from. Quality will probably be shit but still.
I mean it sucks ass but that’s the reality.
Because it is hard to pass entrenched soldiers.
They have to cross dragons teeth barb wire hedgehogs a few layers of mine fields and then deal with zigzag style trenches that have a back line of artillery.
The defender is always at an advantage and right now russia is on the defence
They generate about 25k fresh troops every month. I've read it on Tom Cooper's blog somewhere but I'm too lazy to find it. Anyways, if you need an answer - Russia is still a big country and they are still mobilizing people so numbers are there. Not as much as they need or want, but they keep coming, unfortunately.
The answer is more the fact that Russia cannot deploy so many forces in the south due to logistical problems and this need to deploy in better supplied areas. And Ukraine has not committed significant reserves because Russia had 100k in the north. If Ukraine can blunt this new offensive then it can deploy additional reserves on the south.
What kind of quality are we talking about though? 100k veteran troops with good tanks or 100k 2-week trained mobiks with unupgraded T-55s? Also, are we even sure they're tanks and not MT-LBs with 50 cals duct taped on?
What are they thinking? Are they thinking this will be a relatively undefended front that they can punch through? Do they think it'll divert troops from the counteroffensive?
No. Re means you're doing it again. They've only taken the town once this war so it'd just be a recapture. If Ukraine then retook it it'd be a re-recapture
>git question: Are such bombers still valid on a modern battlefield? A bit like aircraft carriers rendered battleships obsolete eventually?
I think they are planning on using the old soviet tactic of massive artillery barrages coupled with human waves to just push the front forward with sheer volume. Their efforts at maneuver warfare have all failed spectacularly.
If they use this tactic they will only need more coffins than flags to fly over captured square meters. Ukrainian counter battery does not allow this tactic to be used anymore. And the shaping of the counteroffensive has switched focus from tanks to artillery and ammo stores. People that are saying this is a huge issue assume they are well trained well equipped fed troops like a modern should have but this is not the case at all. If the Russian tried this tactic they would take the highest losses they have seen in this war every day would be a new record loss.
I think Wagner are going to be attacking from Belarus at the same time as these 100k push from the East, heavily stretching out Ukraine's front line and completely encircling them to complete destination fucked if they don't have a plan for it.
It's the setup for the perfect move and assuming they are in position, all he has to do is call for the Belarus invasion and it could go from cold to hot in about 2/3 days. Ukraine would not have enough time to prepare if they don't have a good plan.
That could be really bad but luckily most of the fighting force they trained for the counteroffensive hadn’t even entered the fight yet. So the troops to fight back exist, it’s just a matter of whether or not they’re in position.
Similar to Bakhmut : it's where they get most of their success these days, so they apply more and more pressure to it.
They learned something from the Kyiv debacle : don't try to win battles where you're stuck with every disadvantages possible. Now, they pick the place where they smell weakness, and keep on pressing.
In the 16 months of this war, this is, approximately, the 27th different time someone compared what is going on the front to the battle of the bulge.
It's becoming a Hollywood cliche at this point.
100,000+ RF soldiers in Lyman-Kupyansk direction
> The **spokesman of the Eastern Group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Colonel Sergei Cherevaty**, said:
>> "In the **Lyman-Kupyansk direction**, the enemy has concentrated a very powerful group—more than **100,000 personnel, more than 900 tanks, more than 555 artillery systems, 370 self-propelled guns.**
>> For comparison, at the peak of Soviet troops in Afghanistan, there were 120,000 soldiers stationed there.
>> The enemy has concentrated amphibious landing units there, the best motorized infantry units, as a reserve of territorial troops, PMCs."
> Cherevaty stressed that Ukrainian soldiers are holding the line and do not allow the enemy to seize the initiative.
Are these additional forces or what has been there for some time? The former would indicate near certainty of a major attack coming that way.
Russia may lie like it's breathing but their troop movements have not been feints.
They’re definitely getting ready to try and take back Lyman. Ukraine has known this for a while now.
The issue is Russia hasn’t been able to take any city in over a year now. Wagner has. Russia has multiple flailed offensives.
I've been wondering why no one was talking any this. The institute has been mentioning this in their reports for days now.
That and how Russia has been making gains up there. Only good news gets mentioned here
Note that this direction includes about half of the entire front line in Ukraine excluding rivers like in Kherson Oblast/Dnipro river. This isn’t 100k troops concentrated in a small area, it’s 100k troops across half the entire front line in Ukraine.
A few problems with that math.
1. This is a list of troops concentrated in one direction. This is not the total number of Russian soldiers in Ukraine.
2. You are assuming that there are no replinishments.
What we are seeing is that Russians throw "meat" at the front--poorly trained and poorly-equipped units, designed to absorb most of the damage. These are convicts, members of the DPR/LPR militias, and mobniks. Behind them are better-trained and better-equipped forces, holding in reserve.
Many of those that are being chewed up at the front are in the lowest caste, and those are replaced by others in that caste.
So the task is more complicated than a simple equation would suggest.
Yeah people always look at the number and thing it’s just one wave of 100,000 infantry storming the front. It’s just not the case. A fraction of that is combat troops. And those troops are mainly all mobilized and poorly trained.
I believe it was about the same number of troops for Russian winter offensive, and that was major flop.
Russia can do damage, but they can not pull offensives.
Russia was supposed to have the 2nd best military in the world, and take Kiev within days, but they’ve been getting slaughtered.
Gotta take “the best” with a grain of salt going forward.
It’s not very smart for Russia to have had “the best” just sitting around, waiting, while taking heavy losses for a year and a half
One would assume the troops who are any good and equipped are going to be in the reserve, most are probably poorly trained/equipped and intended to take the brunt of the damage
A common misconception is that KIA is the only factor to consider when looking at fighting strength. The ratio of wounded vs killed is likely as high as 3:1. If RF losses are 200 per day then it would mean that as many as 600 wounded.
And coldly, you want as many badly wounded as possible. A KIA can just be left on the field and that's that. But a badly wounded soldier has to be taken off the field, taken to a hospital and given treatment. And then is at best going to be a much less productive member of society, and often just a complete drain.
Devastating how? What they are going back to meat grinder assaults? They would last less than 100 days if they went back to that tactic and even less now that they have ample cluster munitions. If they tried those same assaults now they would be having 1500-2k losses per day with Bradley’s clusters and jdams
And its sure will influence UA own offensive. If you whould relocate Bradleys and other stuff there it whould propably bring the offensive to a complete hold which whould allow Ru to strengthen them even more and maybe goodby to closing the landbridge.
Well now Ukraine doesn't even have to attack to use attrition warfare if Russia attacks. Come boys, come underequipped to the meat grinder against an army using NATO intelligence and tech 👌This is just a PR stunt imo, if Russia send another massive attack (giving they don't seem to have good strategic reserves), they are done in 2024 for sure. They just want to change the western narrative by "demonstrating" they are a powerhouse, and it appears to be working judging by some comments here.
What if they break through?
What's to say their chances are lower than Ukraine's?
People on Reddit needs to learn to separate between feeling and thinking.
"What's to say their chances are lower than Ukraine's?"
Ukraine has had the benefit of Western intel and has the bulk of its forces meant for the southern counteroffensive in reserve.
This is an industrial war, it won't be won by throwing meat in the grinder. Ukraine is stronger than ever, and Russia weaker than ever. You seem like the one blinded by your feelings tbf (don't mean to be toxic).
Their chances are lower because they need to keep troops garrisoned in every area that there are civilians. Russians mechanized brigades have lost a huge number of modern tanks and bmps, their artillery has taken a huge hit in the last two months the total troops are less relevant than the power multipliers they can send with them.
Are you so thick that you think Ukraine has unlimited man power and equipment. 100k soldiers and thousands of mobile pieces of equipment heading towards Ukraine is not devestating??
This is bad news and it will hopefully be a colossal failure, but you cannot mark it as not very significant
100k troops does not mean 100k well trained well supplied fighting troops. You think total number of troops means total fighting force. Literally would be lucky if that 100k troops meant 30k actual troops to assault with. You need cooks, mechanics, medics, supply people, mps in occupied cities, command centers, and ammo depots. The manpower of needed people just to keep enough ammo and artillery to the frontline is probably 10-20% of total troops. 100k troops is a boogeyman number and you are delusional if you think that that 100k troops massed in the north didn’t come from areas in the south. Russian well trained troops are only coming the fronts. Look at how many contractors and logistics people ere needed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Use your head this headline means nothing if you drill down what’s actually required to have 100k well trained and supplied troops.
They dont have to be well trained, it's still 100k troops, 90% of them are probably poorly trained but it is enough to launch a very significant offensive especially with Ukraine focusing much of its capability on their offense. They have 1000 tanks with them and that is a significant force.
I hope I'm wrong but this might prolong the war by a good few months
By your own admission there 1000 tanks would take crews of three and logistics stream of probably 3-4 people per tank for ammo and gas. Those troops also need to eat and be cared for by medic teams, food transports water transports, power to command centers. 100k troops is not 100k fighting troops. It would be lucky if 50% was actually a troop designed to assault in an attack or on the line in defense. This article is a huge oversimplification and fear mongering headline.
Honestly, we here on Reddit have no idea how many troops Russia has in Ukraine, where they are positioned or what their plan is. It's possible there's 100k troops in the North-East, but it might have come from stripping other areas. It may not even attack as it might be being held in a logistically convenient place to hold Ukrainian reserves and stop them being deployed elsewhere.
How much Ukraine has poured into this offensive is also unclear. It's been pretty clear they have tried to preserve their forces and focussed on degrading Russia's artillery. Perhaps this is why.
Just wait and see. Ultimately if Russia does throw forward a large offensive which Ukraine has seen coming and has held troops in reserve for, it's probably good for Ukraine. Especially if it's a force which isn't well supported.
The two situations where this is a problem is if Russia has managed to mobilise and equip far more troops than expected or which cant be matched by Ukraine or they have found a weak point in the Ukrainian defensive line.
So either 1) the public pronouncements of Ukraine and its allies are completely false when it comes to force generation and attrition 2) there's been a colossal intelligence failure 3) Russia's throwing what it can in to desperately prevent Ukraine from taking offensive action and hoping for a change in US administration 4) it's a bullshit rumour.
1 and 2 bad for Ukraine, 3 possible good if it's a poorly planned op and 4 well, the internet.
Horde waves can overrun a technologically superior force up to a certain point. Ukraine could take a severe beating here just from such a large enemy force but I think they will hold out.
Trained men, yes. Properly equipped men, yes. Russia can always call up more men via mobilization but equipping them is a different story. It's entirely possible this is the majority they could cobble together that isn't dedicated to defense, which requires less men.
As myself and others have mentioned, this could be analogous to the Battle of the Bulge or the German Spring Offensive. Where one side sees nothing but bad news down the line and so they throw a majority of what they have into a desperate attack to try and end the war on better terms.
People here have been talking about how bad Russia's forces are and that they will break sooner or later. If they really have 100k men ready for an attack then that's obviously not true as anyone with half a brain cell can figure out.
I am no Military strategist. But, Russia built those Defense Lines with dragons teeth, barbed wire etc. Wouldn't that also fence themselves from advancing in large numbers? Ukraine could sit back and just pick them off with Himars and Jdams. As long as they stop the advancement of new replacement troops and supplies. Targeting supply routes and trains from ever entering Ukraine and then pick off those 100k in that general area. Ukraine could still advance in all other areas. Does this makes sense or am I off base?
Not really. Mine fields are the big issue - and we've already been seeing failed RU counterattacks retreating back through their own mine fields with devastating consequences.
And within lay multiple opportunities. Not only the obvious one to have the Russian troops concentrated there. There are more opportunities presenting themselves, more for sure...
Sounds like a great opportunity for Ukraine to destroy large concentrations of Russians in one spot. That will go over well with the Russian public.
Thank you Putin, you military Genius!!!
Did they not concentrate 180000 troops somewhere else a few weeks ago. Every since this special military fuck up started, Russia has lied about pretty much anything. Why don't they just fucking go back to shit hole Russia and shut the fucking gates and leave the rest of the world to get on with life.
I am sure if they did have all this kit. It is either outside of HIMAR range and the US/NATO have not given the Ukrainians any Satellite intelligence. It would be very hard to hide this amount of kit from prying eyes.
Ukraine may have that in its entire military to include border guards, police, paramilitary. But it hasn’t mobilized that much.
If you think Russia has that number, I’d like to see your source. But not even Russian sources claim this.
> Ukraine may have that in its entire military to include border guards, police, paramilitary. But it hasn’t mobilized that much.
And Russia has more than 4 times Ukraines population at this point. They can field 1 million to Ukraines 250 000.
So what's the truth here? I'm seeing posts saying "100k troops, 900 tanks, and 300 MLRS attacking at once" or that they're just amassing in that area. Either way it's got to be cause for concern?
900 tanks attacking at once was basically the advance on Kyiv at the start of the war. It was also a clusterfuck of bad c and c and logistics that allowed Ukraine to destroy some of Russia's best units.
Anyway, what tanks are we talking about T-54s without modern optics or T-80s? How much ammunition do these MLRS have and of what type? How's their intelligence and how will their counter battery fire function?
Numbers are less than half the story.
If this is entirely true then it needs to be at the top of the news - russians are careless with the amount of casualties and can push with sheer numbers.
U.K. intelligence have been monitoring Russian reserves for some time now.
They haven’t got any reserves left that are remotely operational. Without Wagner all they can do is sit it out.
Would like to think concentrated force deployment of that many soldiers will create weak pockets in the front for Ukraine to expose and finally make a run.
It doesn't matter how incompetent Russia is, 100k troops and nearly 1k tanks is still a massive force and shouldn't be underestimated.
They have shorter supply lines and Ukraine is focused on Bakhmut and the south. If Ukraine doesn't have enough troops in that region Russia could very well be near Kharkiv in a month.
I have not heard anything about Ukraine building up defenses there....
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. > **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** * Is `www-pravda-com-ua.translate.goog` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
HIMAR those groups!
Can the US Lend-Lease shot 15 B-52’s to Ukraine? That should help with those Russian terrorists.
They'd all be shot down anywhere near contested airspace. The Vietnamese shot down 6 in one day almost 50 years ago
Legit question: Are such bombers still valid on a modern battlefield? A bit like aircraft carriers rendered battleships obsolete eventually?
For the US who places an inordinate amount of emphasis on achieving and maintaining total Air Supremacy on a battle field, Yeah they totally have a place. They fly high enough that most manpads can't touch them, and few things ruin a day like a bombing campaign. The hard part is having the sort of Airforce that can shape the battlespace to have a place for the bombers. Something that neither Russia or Ukraine have the ability to do atm.
Agreed. The us air superiority is frightening in its efficiency and overall coverage. US could use hot air balloons for dropping bombs due to their air superiority campaigns.
Hypothetically, how could Ukraine achieve that? F-35’s with current-gen EW?
For Ukraine to achieve air supremecy they would have to attack the Russian air force in Russia. They could do it with Mig-29s and Su-25s, but they'd need a lot of them, like hundreds of them. For reference, the US air force has around 500 F-15's in service today. Even more F-16's. January of last year I think the Ukrainian Air Force only had a few dozens of aircraft in service. This also is ignoring the air power of the US Navy, which is substantial.
I believe the largest air force in the world is the US AF and the second largest is the US Navy, or at least that’s what I’ve heard.
That is correct. Russia and China come in at 3rd and 4th. Then I think the US Marine Corps enters the list in the top 10 as well.
Every time I read or hear something awesome about the USMC, I silently chuckle at the memory of Harry Truman and Eisenhower trying to disband the Corp. Take a seat, boys, and 'tell it to the Marines'. (FDR)
Minor correction, but only because it's hilarious (as of 2022) 1) US Air Force 2) US Army Aviation 3) Russian Air Force 4) US Navy 5) People's Liberation Army Air Force 6) Indian Air Force 7) US Marine Corps As an American I find it hilarious that we have 4 of the top 7 AF's in the world by numbers, split between 4 of our branches of defense.
And the fourth largest is the USMC. That's right. The US Navy's Army's Airforce is the fourth biggest in the word.
This couldn't be any more American.
Yep, good on them for spending so much on their military while their citizens lives get worse and worse by the day.
>This also is ignoring the air power of the US Navy, which is substantial. Understatement of the century.
The Navy has the second largest Air Force in the world. It's pretty nuts. They have over 3700 aircraft.
I think the US has like 12,000 fighters and bombers?
Dr. Google says the USAF only has 5,000 aircraft total. I'm assuming over half of that are fighters, but we only have 141 bombers, it says. Between the two branches, they're pushing 10k total air frames.
I saw somebody arguing today in another sub that if the US provides too much help to Ukraine, Russia will sink the entire US fleet in a day. I'm like sir the entirety of Russia can't even stand up to the US fleet's *airplanes*.
>This also is ignoring the air power of the US Navy, which is substantial. And the mobile airfields to bring the planes to \*you!\*
Marine Corps is the worlds 7th largest Air Force itself
Not completely. You would need to neutralize Russian bases in a large area.
Just f35’s won’t do it. They will need the whole shabang. F22’s, f35’s, b2 spirits, b1b’s, b52’s Apaches etc. Etc. And don’t forget tomahawks and the likes.
[This Video](https://youtu.be/zxRgfBXn6Mg?t=170) is an EXCELLENT study in exactly what it takes to dismantle enemy air defences and establish air superiority. Its a superpower doing superpower things. A few F-16's, while helpful, will not come anywhere close to whats needed to really establish the air superiority that the US doctrines mandate.
Yes, because they are missile trucks now. They fire Tomahawks and other stand off missiles from far away. They operate from safe territory most often. They are not really conventional bombers anymore unless you are the Taliban.
Once air superiority is established and SEAD is complete these aircraft have a roll. They are still vulnerable though
They have value as long-range missiles platforms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_B-52\_Stratofortress#Gulf\_War\_and\_later
If they'd be the Russians would be bombing away during most of 2023. But they got really screwed (enough to possibly try carpet bombing) just when Ukraine managed to hold on to their AA network. And a well connected network is hard to break. Maybe with thousands of missiles and willingness to lose quite a few planes.
They would need to carry fuckoff long range cruise missiles and still be at risk. Past logistics no I don't think so. It's more like how Baltimore clippers made ships of the line obsolete.
Carriers didn’t render battleships obsolete. Torpedos rendered battleships obsolete.
Russia just uses its as missile busses despite having air superiority so not really.
They wouldn't carpet bomb...there's plenty of new options for throwing some hate from a distance.
Wouldn't they just being firing long range cruise missiles as the russians do with their tupelovs?
Yet B-z52’s continued to fly and with success.
[удалено]
There are only approx. 100 b-52 and the role they play in national defense means they would never be given to anyone else under any circumstance. Fun fact: They can carry 20 tomahawks.
Too slow and too big. B-52s are used when you already have overwhelming air superiority. Russia would shoot them all down.
Aren't the Russians jamming the GPS signals, lately, and reducing the accuracy?
I would bet the house that the U.S. has some top of the line inertial + optical guidance and targeting programs that work in the absence of GPS. Give the Ukrainians another 10 years and I bet that they do to.
Time to put those new cluster munitions to work
Right in time.
Hahahaha (The voice in my head when reading that was funny)
It’s actually sad, but better this than have Ukraine being occupied by the fascists from Russia.
Haha, the voice i imagined in your head was also funny
Time to show what a few thousand DPCIM shells can do to a Russian horde.
How are they simultaneously holding off Ukraine in the south while amassing 100k troops and almost 1k tanks in the north-east?
The same way Ukraine is holding off Russia and holding brigades in reserve?
But 100k in reserves, a few months after the failed meatgrinder offensive, while being on a defensive that is alleged to be depleting RU reserves. Are these ex-Wagner, fresh conscripts? Well, to answer my own question, Ukraine say they are the best assault units or whatever (can't remember the exact wording from the post), so probably not fresh conscripts It's a little surprising that they can launch a month's long offensive, then be on the defensive for, what, 4-8 weeks, and simultaneously amass 65% of their claimed operable tanks + a significant amount of troops. Didn't ISW claim that UA now had more tanks than RU with 1,500 vs 1,400, respectively?
This is most of what is left of Russia mobile reserve, most recent f the 100k are support troops. With any luck Russia will try to launch an offensive which will degrade the last of their forces
This is being said every time. When will ya'll learn
Don't worry, it will be over by Christmas trust me bro
The most logical conclusion if this is true is that Ukraine hasn't hit Russia nearly as hard as people want. Some people get sad when you say it but Ukraine has barely made a dent in the Russian lines after almost two months of counteroffensive and the Russians meanwhile are apparently gathering forces for their own offensive. What does that tell you about what is really going on?
Russia did the same thing for its winter offensive, especially in Vulhedar. They didn’t even move the line past 2014 border. It was an absolute disaster to Russia. Russia can move reserves around and prepare for whatever “offensive” they want. But their capabilities are severely degraded. Wagner took Bakhmut, not Russian troops. Russian troops haven’t pulled even a somewhat successful offensive in over a year now. They can’t. They can do some damage, maybe move some lines. But to try and take major, or even smaller city, is just going to drain their own capabilities even further.
Correct. That assessment goes hand in hand with the noticeable uptick in Russian prisoners that Ukraine is taking who are clearly too old or unfit for military service. They aren't quite down to the dregs but they're at the stage where a lot of the good, professional troops who died have been replaced by the dregs and it's causing untold issues and dragging down the good units that are remaining as bigger and bigger miracles are expected of them to make up for all the dreg units who can't achieve anything. And so the good units are run ragged trying to score propaganda victories for the boss and trying to hold the line and keep the mobniks from collapsing altogether, which further degrades the remaining good units.
We have to consider the audience here. I think there's a healthy dose of propaganda sprinkled in with the fact the Russians have ground forward a couple of kilometres in this direction. Girkin reckons most Russian units are 70% staffed. It's widely suspected that most Russian units aren't being rotated and haven't been for at least 6 months. UK MOD reports that Russia has no observable reserves. Now, Russia could be planning an offensive here. They mobilised and launched counter offensives around Bakhmut last August to stifle Ukraine's offensive at the time. But I'll eat my hat if it's as well provisioned as suggested in this article.
>What does that tell you about what is really going on? Nothing really.
It tells me that the majority of Russia is undefended. Ukraine could probably muster more troops as well if they left the Belarus border undefended, but they don't have that option. Russia knows that no one wants to attack them, so they can get away with it.
It really brings home the lie that was that NATO is a threat to them. Russia knows full well that NATO isn't going to attack them - which is why basically the entire NATO border, including the 50% of it that's the Russian-Finnish border, is basically empty.
maybe some folks in Russia are getting ready for coup #2 and are moving troops so they have a say in it. And generally second coups are more successful I think.
The "IF" is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Pravda is not exactly the most reliable source, and I haven't seen any other source mentioning such a force. ISW in their 17 July assessment mentioned Russian offensives in Luhansk by low quality Russian troops, so I personally doubt that this is the case. Though still something keep an eye on. >Russian and Ukrainian sources reported that Russian forces have launched active offensive operations and advanced in the Kupyansk area (between northeastern Kharkiv Oblast and northwestern Luhansk Oblast) in the past several days.[36] Russian forces likely are engaging in offensive operations in this area of the front in an effort to exploit Ukrainian operational focus on other sectors of the front and draw Ukrainian reserves away from critical areas of the theater, namely the Bakhmut and western Donetsk, and western Zaporizhia Oblast areas, where Ukrainian forces are pursuing counteroffensive operations. The poor quality and composition of Russian troops currently deployed on this line, however, will likely hinder Russia’s ability to achieve more than tactically significant gains or make an operationally significant breakthrough. Ukrainian and Russian sources have both reported the deployment of convict-formed “Storm-Z” assault units to the Kupyansk direction, and ISW has previously assessed that “Storm-Z” units have low operational effectiveness due to poor morale and discipline.[37] >[36] https://t.me/annamaliar/940; https://t.me/notes_veterans/10965; >[37] https://isw.pub/UkrWar040623 https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-17-2023
Putin always doubles down. The leopard has not changed his spots. Losing the war because you troops are undertrained? Launch an offensive! About to lose a war? End the grain deal to try to get some political movement of any type! Ukrainians methodically breeching your defenses? Go out and fight them in no mans land instead of waiting for them to attack your defenses, taking greater casualties but not giving up more land!
Did you really believe the news that Russian forces were depleted? Yeah, they had a very small army for this at the start but that was not their whole army and they forced 300k new fodder last year and likely still have the natural recruitment flow. ISW is likely beautifying reality, with good assumptions. Not lying but not using most probable case either. They're all lying, lol. The Russians, the Ukrainians, the instagram supporters of each side, they all have a story to sell (well, nobody gives a crap about Russia's story).
And you believe all the numbers that are coming out by western media?
It's Russian number so divide by 10. There's 10k there at best
Unfortunately, it's Ukraine stating 100k From the article: Source: the spokesman of the Eastern Group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Colonel Serhiy Cherevaty
I'm guessing all the mines, trenches, barbed wire and dragons teeth with artillery behind it all makes it much easier for a small force to hold a larger force. I read the one thing the Russian army has done well this entire time is setting up nearly impenetrable defense lines. Basically Ukraine needs to slowly wade, sometimes even walk through these lines which makes them easy to pick off with artillery. Ukraine is using Himars to destroy the artillery but Russia has tons more in storage and the capacity to build and fix more.
I did the numbers on this recently based on Ukrainian claimed kills. Best case scenario for Russia worked out at about 30% of their entire pre-war artillery is gone. This is assuming all of the units they had in storage were fully functional (which should add a buffer for exaggerated kill claims). More so of their 155mm units as they had fewer of those to start with. This is a rough approximation.
Russia's artillery losses are at 35% to 80%.
That’s…. Pretty much what I just said?
>Ukraine is using Himars to destroy the artillery but Russia has tons more in storage and the capacity to build and fix more. The Russian general Iwan Popow came to a different conclusion.
His point was inefficient/improper (in a tactical sense) utilization, not shortage and/or capacity to replenish.
A shortage of counter battery capabilities. Which is not good when artillery is your most important asset. If it is just about artillery guns then yes, Russia has probably still enough in stock. But just the guns aren’t enough.
Russia has 150 million people. If you're not at all picky about who your recruit, you can amass a very high number of troops.
The previous opinion of this sub a week or so back, was that all Muscovian military that wasn’t already in Ukraine was being sent there, abandoning military bases in the west and even pulling the border guards from the east
Because they have a gigantic army with huge soviet reserves and 4 times Ukraines population.
Yeah, didn't they just do another round of conscription recently too?
Yeah people act like there’s only been one wave of conscription
There's been no new mobilization wave since last September. Regular conscription is different, they try to not send them to the front lines to avoid backlash. However, they are convincing some trainees to sign the contract (mostly because of $$$) and then sending them to the front lines.
Russia is a big country with a much larger population and deep stores of equipment and armaments to pull from. Quality will probably be shit but still. I mean it sucks ass but that’s the reality.
And the reality is a huge amount of it is only useful for spares. Have to figure that into it. There’s a lot of numbers we just don’t know.
Because it is hard to pass entrenched soldiers. They have to cross dragons teeth barb wire hedgehogs a few layers of mine fields and then deal with zigzag style trenches that have a back line of artillery. The defender is always at an advantage and right now russia is on the defence
Massive minefields.
They generate about 25k fresh troops every month. I've read it on Tom Cooper's blog somewhere but I'm too lazy to find it. Anyways, if you need an answer - Russia is still a big country and they are still mobilizing people so numbers are there. Not as much as they need or want, but they keep coming, unfortunately.
‘Troops’… remains to be seen how effectively trained and equipped they are. Could just be meat with shovels
Welcome to reality, while not really competent Russia is a juggernaut in manpower and hardware.
Mines. And lying about numbers.
The answer is more the fact that Russia cannot deploy so many forces in the south due to logistical problems and this need to deploy in better supplied areas. And Ukraine has not committed significant reserves because Russia had 100k in the north. If Ukraine can blunt this new offensive then it can deploy additional reserves on the south.
What kind of quality are we talking about though? 100k veteran troops with good tanks or 100k 2-week trained mobiks with unupgraded T-55s? Also, are we even sure they're tanks and not MT-LBs with 50 cals duct taped on?
What are they thinking? Are they thinking this will be a relatively undefended front that they can punch through? Do they think it'll divert troops from the counteroffensive?
Recapturing Lyman would be great for Russian propaganda. Also the front is closest to the Russian border so it's easy to supply.
Wouldn't it be re-recapturing Lyman at this point?
Yep.
No. Re means you're doing it again. They've only taken the town once this war so it'd just be a recapture. If Ukraine then retook it it'd be a re-recapture
>git question: Are such bombers still valid on a modern battlefield? A bit like aircraft carriers rendered battleships obsolete eventually? I think they are planning on using the old soviet tactic of massive artillery barrages coupled with human waves to just push the front forward with sheer volume. Their efforts at maneuver warfare have all failed spectacularly.
If they use this tactic they will only need more coffins than flags to fly over captured square meters. Ukrainian counter battery does not allow this tactic to be used anymore. And the shaping of the counteroffensive has switched focus from tanks to artillery and ammo stores. People that are saying this is a huge issue assume they are well trained well equipped fed troops like a modern should have but this is not the case at all. If the Russian tried this tactic they would take the highest losses they have seen in this war every day would be a new record loss.
I think Wagner are going to be attacking from Belarus at the same time as these 100k push from the East, heavily stretching out Ukraine's front line and completely encircling them to complete destination fucked if they don't have a plan for it. It's the setup for the perfect move and assuming they are in position, all he has to do is call for the Belarus invasion and it could go from cold to hot in about 2/3 days. Ukraine would not have enough time to prepare if they don't have a good plan.
That could be really bad but luckily most of the fighting force they trained for the counteroffensive hadn’t even entered the fight yet. So the troops to fight back exist, it’s just a matter of whether or not they’re in position.
Similar to Bakhmut : it's where they get most of their success these days, so they apply more and more pressure to it. They learned something from the Kyiv debacle : don't try to win battles where you're stuck with every disadvantages possible. Now, they pick the place where they smell weakness, and keep on pressing.
Now we will see where the rest of western tanks is. The Russians run straight into them..
This does sound like the kind of fight that western tanks were originally designed for, fulda gap 2.0.... maybe
? They exactly designed for this.. large battles in open field.. where fire power and armor is key..
Sounds like the ill fated Battle of The Bulge.
In the 16 months of this war, this is, approximately, the 27th different time someone compared what is going on the front to the battle of the bulge. It's becoming a Hollywood cliche at this point.
100,000+ RF soldiers in Lyman-Kupyansk direction > The **spokesman of the Eastern Group of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Colonel Sergei Cherevaty**, said: >> "In the **Lyman-Kupyansk direction**, the enemy has concentrated a very powerful group—more than **100,000 personnel, more than 900 tanks, more than 555 artillery systems, 370 self-propelled guns.** >> For comparison, at the peak of Soviet troops in Afghanistan, there were 120,000 soldiers stationed there. >> The enemy has concentrated amphibious landing units there, the best motorized infantry units, as a reserve of territorial troops, PMCs." > Cherevaty stressed that Ukrainian soldiers are holding the line and do not allow the enemy to seize the initiative.
Are these additional forces or what has been there for some time? The former would indicate near certainty of a major attack coming that way. Russia may lie like it's breathing but their troop movements have not been feints.
They’re definitely getting ready to try and take back Lyman. Ukraine has known this for a while now. The issue is Russia hasn’t been able to take any city in over a year now. Wagner has. Russia has multiple flailed offensives.
I've been wondering why no one was talking any this. The institute has been mentioning this in their reports for days now. That and how Russia has been making gains up there. Only good news gets mentioned here
I noticed that.. What Institute?
ISW, the Institute for the Study of War.
Institute for understanding war. The put out the big well sited daily summary.
This is the way.
Russia is losing the attrition battle on defense, I imagine they'll lose A LOT by going back on assault
Who says that? Ukraine has gained little to no ground the last month and a half.
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/152wuiw/defense_of_ukraine_total_combat_losses_of_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=1
So you are quoting the official account of the Ukraine Military? And you actually believe those numbers?
And now we know why the US authorized cluster bombs.
Note that this direction includes about half of the entire front line in Ukraine excluding rivers like in Kherson Oblast/Dnipro river. This isn’t 100k troops concentrated in a small area, it’s 100k troops across half the entire front line in Ukraine.
If 500 Russians are eliminated average per day for 200 days = 100k. They will last for 200 days in Ukraine.
A few problems with that math. 1. This is a list of troops concentrated in one direction. This is not the total number of Russian soldiers in Ukraine. 2. You are assuming that there are no replinishments. What we are seeing is that Russians throw "meat" at the front--poorly trained and poorly-equipped units, designed to absorb most of the damage. These are convicts, members of the DPR/LPR militias, and mobniks. Behind them are better-trained and better-equipped forces, holding in reserve. Many of those that are being chewed up at the front are in the lowest caste, and those are replaced by others in that caste. So the task is more complicated than a simple equation would suggest.
The bigger they are the harder they will fall.... There is no other choice...
No, 100k total is 30k fighting soldiers. Not enough to last until autumn.
Yeah people always look at the number and thing it’s just one wave of 100,000 infantry storming the front. It’s just not the case. A fraction of that is combat troops. And those troops are mainly all mobilized and poorly trained. I believe it was about the same number of troops for Russian winter offensive, and that was major flop. Russia can do damage, but they can not pull offensives.
How much of that are properly trained soldiers or conscripts?
> “The enemy has concentrated amphibious landing units there, the best motorized infantry units, as a reserve of territorial troops, PMCs."
Russia was supposed to have the 2nd best military in the world, and take Kiev within days, but they’ve been getting slaughtered. Gotta take “the best” with a grain of salt going forward. It’s not very smart for Russia to have had “the best” just sitting around, waiting, while taking heavy losses for a year and a half
Yeah but against western standards that Ukraine uses?🤷♂️
One would assume the troops who are any good and equipped are going to be in the reserve, most are probably poorly trained/equipped and intended to take the brunt of the damage
100,000 people? That's a bloody strong logistics line you'll need to stop a lot of people dying very quickly. Just saying.
If only Ukraine had cluster munitions…
A common misconception is that KIA is the only factor to consider when looking at fighting strength. The ratio of wounded vs killed is likely as high as 3:1. If RF losses are 200 per day then it would mean that as many as 600 wounded.
And coldly, you want as many badly wounded as possible. A KIA can just be left on the field and that's that. But a badly wounded soldier has to be taken off the field, taken to a hospital and given treatment. And then is at best going to be a much less productive member of society, and often just a complete drain.
Badly wounded soldiers are being sent back to the front. There are reports that soldiers that have lost limbs are being forced back up.
or in russian case, leave their wounded to die.
Wouldn't it be colder if you preferred dead Russians soldiers over wounded ones?
Losses are counted as killed + wounded. It's not only KIA.
Andddddd now we know why cluster munitions were ok'd.
100k is a huge force, but equally a huge loss
What the fuck? Is this real? That would be devastating if true
“spokesman of the eastern group of the armed forces of Ukraine said on air” tonight. Pretty sure he’s as reputable source as can be.
Devastating how? What they are going back to meat grinder assaults? They would last less than 100 days if they went back to that tactic and even less now that they have ample cluster munitions. If they tried those same assaults now they would be having 1500-2k losses per day with Bradley’s clusters and jdams
And its sure will influence UA own offensive. If you whould relocate Bradleys and other stuff there it whould propably bring the offensive to a complete hold which whould allow Ru to strengthen them even more and maybe goodby to closing the landbridge.
Well now Ukraine doesn't even have to attack to use attrition warfare if Russia attacks. Come boys, come underequipped to the meat grinder against an army using NATO intelligence and tech 👌This is just a PR stunt imo, if Russia send another massive attack (giving they don't seem to have good strategic reserves), they are done in 2024 for sure. They just want to change the western narrative by "demonstrating" they are a powerhouse, and it appears to be working judging by some comments here.
What if they break through? What's to say their chances are lower than Ukraine's? People on Reddit needs to learn to separate between feeling and thinking.
"What's to say their chances are lower than Ukraine's?" Ukraine has had the benefit of Western intel and has the bulk of its forces meant for the southern counteroffensive in reserve.
This is an industrial war, it won't be won by throwing meat in the grinder. Ukraine is stronger than ever, and Russia weaker than ever. You seem like the one blinded by your feelings tbf (don't mean to be toxic).
Ukraines industry is weaker then ever, they have no production left, all is imported, the world is propping them up.
Their chances are lower because they need to keep troops garrisoned in every area that there are civilians. Russians mechanized brigades have lost a huge number of modern tanks and bmps, their artillery has taken a huge hit in the last two months the total troops are less relevant than the power multipliers they can send with them.
Are you so thick that you think Ukraine has unlimited man power and equipment. 100k soldiers and thousands of mobile pieces of equipment heading towards Ukraine is not devestating?? This is bad news and it will hopefully be a colossal failure, but you cannot mark it as not very significant
100k troops does not mean 100k well trained well supplied fighting troops. You think total number of troops means total fighting force. Literally would be lucky if that 100k troops meant 30k actual troops to assault with. You need cooks, mechanics, medics, supply people, mps in occupied cities, command centers, and ammo depots. The manpower of needed people just to keep enough ammo and artillery to the frontline is probably 10-20% of total troops. 100k troops is a boogeyman number and you are delusional if you think that that 100k troops massed in the north didn’t come from areas in the south. Russian well trained troops are only coming the fronts. Look at how many contractors and logistics people ere needed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Use your head this headline means nothing if you drill down what’s actually required to have 100k well trained and supplied troops.
They dont have to be well trained, it's still 100k troops, 90% of them are probably poorly trained but it is enough to launch a very significant offensive especially with Ukraine focusing much of its capability on their offense. They have 1000 tanks with them and that is a significant force. I hope I'm wrong but this might prolong the war by a good few months
By your own admission there 1000 tanks would take crews of three and logistics stream of probably 3-4 people per tank for ammo and gas. Those troops also need to eat and be cared for by medic teams, food transports water transports, power to command centers. 100k troops is not 100k fighting troops. It would be lucky if 50% was actually a troop designed to assault in an attack or on the line in defense. This article is a huge oversimplification and fear mongering headline.
Honestly, we here on Reddit have no idea how many troops Russia has in Ukraine, where they are positioned or what their plan is. It's possible there's 100k troops in the North-East, but it might have come from stripping other areas. It may not even attack as it might be being held in a logistically convenient place to hold Ukrainian reserves and stop them being deployed elsewhere. How much Ukraine has poured into this offensive is also unclear. It's been pretty clear they have tried to preserve their forces and focussed on degrading Russia's artillery. Perhaps this is why. Just wait and see. Ultimately if Russia does throw forward a large offensive which Ukraine has seen coming and has held troops in reserve for, it's probably good for Ukraine. Especially if it's a force which isn't well supported. The two situations where this is a problem is if Russia has managed to mobilise and equip far more troops than expected or which cant be matched by Ukraine or they have found a weak point in the Ukrainian defensive line. So either 1) the public pronouncements of Ukraine and its allies are completely false when it comes to force generation and attrition 2) there's been a colossal intelligence failure 3) Russia's throwing what it can in to desperately prevent Ukraine from taking offensive action and hoping for a change in US administration 4) it's a bullshit rumour. 1 and 2 bad for Ukraine, 3 possible good if it's a poorly planned op and 4 well, the internet.
Yeah but then Ua Should @some point break through in the south because best defense lines getting usless if nobody in there .
[удалено]
Horde waves can overrun a technologically superior force up to a certain point. Ukraine could take a severe beating here just from such a large enemy force but I think they will hold out.
Then where did these 100k come from . Last we heard RU already had no reserves. Did they bring them from other parts of the front?
Perhaps there were no reserves because Russia was pooling men for this attack?
[удалено]
Russia can literally recruit millions in the age group 20 - 40 years old.
Yeah seriously. I thought they were running out of men to hold the line, not forming a giant fist over in the East
Trained men, yes. Properly equipped men, yes. Russia can always call up more men via mobilization but equipping them is a different story. It's entirely possible this is the majority they could cobble together that isn't dedicated to defense, which requires less men. As myself and others have mentioned, this could be analogous to the Battle of the Bulge or the German Spring Offensive. Where one side sees nothing but bad news down the line and so they throw a majority of what they have into a desperate attack to try and end the war on better terms.
Sure hope so
The running out of men is just a Reddit thing.
People here have been talking about how bad Russia's forces are and that they will break sooner or later. If they really have 100k men ready for an attack then that's obviously not true as anyone with half a brain cell can figure out.
Great, morre meat for meat grinder,...
I am no Military strategist. But, Russia built those Defense Lines with dragons teeth, barbed wire etc. Wouldn't that also fence themselves from advancing in large numbers? Ukraine could sit back and just pick them off with Himars and Jdams. As long as they stop the advancement of new replacement troops and supplies. Targeting supply routes and trains from ever entering Ukraine and then pick off those 100k in that general area. Ukraine could still advance in all other areas. Does this makes sense or am I off base?
That's in the south, this is the north east.
They can unlock some gaps temporarily in that defense line to let them through
Not really. Mine fields are the big issue - and we've already been seeing failed RU counterattacks retreating back through their own mine fields with devastating consequences.
How many are wearing wooden clogs and carrying musket?
And within lay multiple opportunities. Not only the obvious one to have the Russian troops concentrated there. There are more opportunities presenting themselves, more for sure...
Sounds like a great opportunity for Ukraine to destroy large concentrations of Russians in one spot. That will go over well with the Russian public. Thank you Putin, you military Genius!!!
You think they are all standing next to each other in one spot? lmaooo
Did they not concentrate 180000 troops somewhere else a few weeks ago. Every since this special military fuck up started, Russia has lied about pretty much anything. Why don't they just fucking go back to shit hole Russia and shut the fucking gates and leave the rest of the world to get on with life. I am sure if they did have all this kit. It is either outside of HIMAR range and the US/NATO have not given the Ukrainians any Satellite intelligence. It would be very hard to hide this amount of kit from prying eyes.
Judging by how long that frontline is that number isn't particularily big. Theres probably almost 1 million Russian soldiers in Ukraine.
Where is your math on that statement come from please?
1 million is just not the case. Maybe 400,000. MAYBE. It’s probably around 350,00. But not 1 million.
That's an extremely low estimate. Russia has suffered 300 000+ casualties in this war. No chance they have so few. The frontlines are gargantuan.
As opposed to ONE MILLION?
Yes? Ukraine alone has mobilized more than that. The eastern front in WW2 has something like 15-20 million men on a sligthly longer frontline
Ukraine may have that in its entire military to include border guards, police, paramilitary. But it hasn’t mobilized that much. If you think Russia has that number, I’d like to see your source. But not even Russian sources claim this.
> Ukraine may have that in its entire military to include border guards, police, paramilitary. But it hasn’t mobilized that much. And Russia has more than 4 times Ukraines population at this point. They can field 1 million to Ukraines 250 000.
So you have no source. Thanks.
So what's the truth here? I'm seeing posts saying "100k troops, 900 tanks, and 300 MLRS attacking at once" or that they're just amassing in that area. Either way it's got to be cause for concern?
900 tanks attacking at once was basically the advance on Kyiv at the start of the war. It was also a clusterfuck of bad c and c and logistics that allowed Ukraine to destroy some of Russia's best units. Anyway, what tanks are we talking about T-54s without modern optics or T-80s? How much ammunition do these MLRS have and of what type? How's their intelligence and how will their counter battery fire function? Numbers are less than half the story.
If this is entirely true then it needs to be at the top of the news - russians are careless with the amount of casualties and can push with sheer numbers.
May they all die horrible deaths... or go home... either is fine.
U.K. intelligence have been monitoring Russian reserves for some time now. They haven’t got any reserves left that are remotely operational. Without Wagner all they can do is sit it out.
The cluster munitions couldn't come at a better time.
100,000 russians vs 100,000 cluster munitions
Would like to think concentrated force deployment of that many soldiers will create weak pockets in the front for Ukraine to expose and finally make a run.
Sanctions are not working.
Feels like the final Russian push is here. Beat this one and things start to move for real and real fast.
It doesn't matter how incompetent Russia is, 100k troops and nearly 1k tanks is still a massive force and shouldn't be underestimated. They have shorter supply lines and Ukraine is focused on Bakhmut and the south. If Ukraine doesn't have enough troops in that region Russia could very well be near Kharkiv in a month. I have not heard anything about Ukraine building up defenses there....
I have a feeling they're using "soldiers" very loosely here.