Russia, Ukraine and the West

[Vangelovski]

Interesting story, and there might be some truth to it, but some facts:

Russia produces 87% of the world's titanium.

Russia actually only produces about 16% of the worlds titanium.

https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2021/mcs2021-titanium.pdf

The US imports 57% of its titanium from Africa and another 35% from Australia. Only 7% come from Ukraine and Russia doesn't even make the list.

https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/USA/year/2018/tradeflow/Imports/partner/ALL/product/261400#

The main (90%) volume of Western military and material assistance to the Kyiv regime, which lost over 70% of the weapons available on February 24, comes by rail from western Ukraine (Lviv), bordering Poland and Slovakia.

Vulnerabilities - three bridge crossings within the range of tactical missiles and airborne forces, which can be destroyed by three pinpoint strikes at known coordinates. In this case, communications that support the viability and military stability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and the regime as a whole will be destroyed with the prospect of restoration at least a month or two.

Ukraine has 21 border crossings with NATO countries (Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Romania). Only 5 are bridge crossings, the rest are land. This does not include river ports and airlift.

Most of these border crossings are based on border towns. Bombing them would involve bombing a NATO country. This is the reason the Russians don't hit them. Even if a border crossing was only a bridge over a river, half of that bridge belongs to a NATO country.

Alternative trucking by road does not compensate for the logistical disaster.

Of course it does. Trucking runs the Australian economy, not rail and we're a continent the size of Europe. NATO weapons deliveries to Ukraine are not based on rail alone. They are also trucked by road and airlited.

https://theconversation.com/how-weapons-get-to-ukraine-and-whats-needed-to-protect-vulnerable-supply-chains-179285#:~:text=Once%20the%20weapons%20and%20equipment,or%20southwestern%20Ukraine%2C%20including%20Poland%2C

[Phoenix]

Looks like Kherson is back in Ukrainian hands.

https://www.9news.com.au/world/russi...2-999759af02c5

The true balance of which side is in control of this situation will be revealed over the next 4 to 6 weeks.

Firstly, it’s a waiting game for winter to set in and for the ground to freeze, so movement of heavy equipment is made easier.

Secondly, some +200K Russian reservists need to be fully incorporated into new units. When this happens the Russian side will not be at the 1:3 disadvantage they were at in the beginning of this conflict.
In 4 - 6 weeks time the Russian side will be fighting on comparable manpower terms for the first time in 10 months and an overwhelming advantage in heavy weaponry.

The Ukrainian side has still only managed very small and insignificant battlefield victories that have served short term morale wins for their domestic audience at a time when the Russians were in a state of flux.
Some soldiers had left battle for R&R, some had left after serving their contracted term, maneuvering of heavy equipment became difficult in the period before the winter freeze.

Many of these conditions at this time of the year has made it briefly difficult for the Russians to resupply their men and to adequately defend a frontline that is stretched for over 1000 km.

These are Ukraines victories, throwing everything they have at holes in the Russian frontline, a front that is defended by some 4 to 5 soldiers per km…at Kherson the Russian contingent could not easily be resupplied and with their backs to the river they were in danger of being surrounded and wiped out - land is easily conceded and temporarily lost but it can just as easily be retaken, on the other hand manpower if lost is lost forever.

Kherson was a tactical Russian withdrawal not a Ukrainian victory nor the beginnings of a deep Ukrainian counter offensive to win back lost territories and it’s certainly no indication of Russian weakness or ineptitude.

Once the ground freezes and all Russian reservists are incorporated into their units the game changes for good and it will be very ugly for Ukraine.

[Vangelovski]

The true balance of which side is in control of this situation will be revealed over the next 4 to 6 weeks.

I think it's a little late for that. If the Russians had any intention (i.e., capacity) to return, they would not have blown the Antonivsky Bridge. They would not have wasted time and resources they don't have to spare setting up defensive lines on the East bank of the Dnipro.

Firstly, it’s a waiting game for winter to set in and for the ground to freeze, so movement of heavy equipment is made easier.

No one's moving tanks and artillery over a frozen river, if it even freezes.

at Kherson the Russian contingent could not easily be resupplied and with their backs to the river they were in danger of being surrounded and wiped out

That's what getting your ass kicked is - losing men and equipment, not having the ability to resupply and being in danger of being surrounded and wiped out.

Kherson was a tactical Russian withdrawal not a Ukrainian victory nor the beginnings of a deep Ukrainian counter offensive to win back lost territories and it’s certainly no indication of Russian weakness or ineptitude.

Kiev was a "tactical withdrawal". Chernihiv and Sumy were "tactical withdrawals". The entire northern front was a "tactical withdrawal". Kharkiv was a "tactical withdrawal". Kherson was a "tactical withdrawal". Russia has been "tactically withdrawing" for the past 7.5 months and has "tactically withdrawn" from 50% of all the territory it captured during its initial attack.

Armies only "tactically withdraw" when their getting their arse's kicked. It's called defeat. Politicians spinning a narrative call it a "tactical withdrawal".

[Phoenix]

I think it's a little late for that. If the Russians had any intention (i.e., capacity) to return, they would not have blown the Antonivsky Bridge. They would not have wasted time and resources they don't have to spare setting up defensive lines on the East bank of the Dnipro.

The Russians were undermanned in comparison to the Ukrainian force attacking them, a tactical withdrawal would still require blowing up the bridge to stop further (albeit temporary) Ukrainian advance under such circumstances. Meanwhile the establishment of a new defensive line on the other bank of the river also has the advantage of being on higher ground compared to the position that they vacated, perfect for the artillery barrage that will be unleashed on the Ukrainians soon enough.

…No one's moving tanks and artillery over a frozen river, if it even freezes.

I wasn’t referring to the river freezing, I was talking about the ground freezing, it’s difficult for man and machine to work efficiently and effectively in deep mud…to be effective, artillery pieces (the backbone of Russian military doctrine) need to be highly maneuverable after firing their salvos, they need to be quickly repositioned to avoid counter battery fire, last thing you want is your artillery piece being stuck in mud and being a sitting duck for enemy fire.

That's what getting your ass kicked is - losing men and equipment, not having the ability to resupply and being in danger of being surrounded and wiped out.

Ukraine is losing far more than Russia is…Ukraine has lost most of its better trained men, it is finding it difficult to arm the men it has left and the western systems being brought into Ukraine are too few in number and often require more retraining for Ukrainian forces to use them effectively…only one side of this conflict is highly dependent on outside benefactors to meet its resupply needs - how long do you think Zelenskyy will be able to do that for…?

Kiev was a "tactical withdrawal". Chernihiv and Sumy were "tactical withdrawals". The entire northern front was a "tactical withdrawal". Kharkiv was a "tactical withdrawal". Kherson was a "tactical withdrawal". Russia has been "tactically withdrawing" for the past 7.5 months and has "tactically withdrawn" from 50% of all the territory it captured during its initial attack.

Armies only "tactically withdraw" when their getting their arse's kicked. It's called defeat. Politicians spinning a narrative call it a "tactical withdrawal".

The modern battlefield is a dynamic environment, things rarely go to plan, armies have setbacks and the unforeseen often becomes reality but good commanders are aware of the need to be reactive to disruptions…some withdrawals are a necessity, many are purely tactical to reshape the dynamics of the battlefield - Kherson is one of many such examples in this conflict at the end of the day just take a look at the map…Ukrainian gains are small slivers and pockets along the frontline due to the many reasons already identified in this thread.

I’ll say it again - the next 4 - 6 weeks will be the last of the softly softly unRussian like approach to warfare, after this 4-6 week timeframe the Russians will unleash hell.

[Vangelovski]

I’ll say it again - the next 4 - 6 weeks will be the last of the softly softly unRussian like approach to warfare, after this 4-6 week timeframe the Russians will unleash hell.

What is your prediction for the next 4-6 weeks exactly? That Russia will regain territory? Cause significant damage to the Ukrainian army? Get resupplied from Iran and North Korea?

[Vangelovski]

I think this is a very likely scenario for Ukraine's next offensive. It removes the need to cross the Dnipro River or undertake an amphibious landing from sea to take the remaining part of the Kherson Oblast under Russian control and then move onto Crimea. Not much has been happening in this Zaporizhzhia region and I suspect the Ukrainians have been building up their forces there. Russia on the other hand is desperately short of men and material and the entire region (along with Donetsk and Luhansk) is within range of Ukrainian HIMARS, enabling them to target Russian supplies, logistics centers, communications and command HQ.

And there are growing hints from troops on the ground, and volunteers close to them, that the Ukrainians are preparing for a new land offensive between those two fronts, south through the Zaporizhzhia region toward Melitopol, challenging Russia’s hold on the entire southern area that it seized in the invasion that began in February.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/12/world/europe/ukraine-war-strategy-russia.html

[Vangelovski]

Weapons systems, no matter how advanced, are meaningless if their operators cannot take full advantage of them. The Russian Air Force is a case in point.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/11/12/fly-low-get-aggressive-how-ukrainian-pilots-fought-the-russian-air-force-to-a-standstill/?sh=4c8ce7352741

[Phoenix]

What is your prediction for the next 4-6 weeks exactly? That Russia will regain territory? Cause significant damage to the Ukrainian army? Get resupplied from Iran and North Korea?

I'm saying nothing much will happen for another 4 to 6 weeks.
Russian forces in certain positions along the frontline are at their most vulnerable at the moment.

The relatively small Russian force fighting in Ukraine was heavily dependent on manoeuvre tactics which have been recently impeded due to the weather (the period between late autumn and the winter freeze)

Manoeuvre warfare requires strong and efficient logistics capabilities but those efforts have been hampered by the weather and the deployment of the reserve forces.

In 4 to 6 weeks, when the temperature is mostly below zero and the ground freezes, manoeuvre warfare becomes easier and most of the reserve forces will be ready for duty and Russian operations can ramp up without the recent logistic disruptions.

I think the goal of the Russians will be the same moving forward, to establish control (protection) of the newly incorporated regions, to continue the destruction of the Ukrainian military (in all of its forms) and thus force Zelensky and his backers into a corner.

Russia buying hardware from other nations is not new, all militaries during conflicts do the same...why wouldn't Russia take advantage of cheap drones from Iran if they're effective and/or need to be tested and evaluated in a conflict zone?

I read something today that Ukraine will be getting artillery shells from South Korea...many sources are claiming that the US military is stretched to resupply the Ukrainians with everything that they need. Even in the latest $400M instalment the number of artillery shells supplied by the US was good for less than a week of fighting.

Once again I think the Russian industrial military complex is better geared to resupply than the US is at the moment.

[Carlin]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.timesofindia.com/world/europe/turkey-rejects-us-condolences-over-istanbul-attack-interior-minister/amp_articleshow/95505670.cms

Turkish Interior Minister: We know where the terrorist attack in Istanbul was coordinated from, we do not accept the condolences of the US Embassy

[Vangelovski]

Looks like the British have trained them well. But we'll have to see if the Ukrainians can turn this into a foothold for further advances.

According to Russian media sources, the Ukrainian army has entered the city of Herois’ke, in the Kinburn Peninsula in the southern part of Kherson, following an amphibious operation, as heavy fighting continues across the region.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/14/russia-ukraine-war-at-a-glance-what-we-know-on-day-265-of-the-invasion

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=4c859784304d

[Risto the Great]

Ministry of Economy signed a Memorandum with the world’s largest investment company

https://www.kmu.gov.ua/en/news/ministerstvo-ekonomiki-ukrayini-pidpisalo-memorandum-iz-najbilshoyu-investkompaniyeyu-svitu

The Ministry of Economy of Ukraine and BlackRock, the world’s largest investment company, have signed a Memorandum of Understanding agreeing on a framework for consultative assistance in developing a special platform to attract private capital for the recovery and support of Ukraine’s economy.

The platform will focus on mobilizing investment in key sectors of Ukrainian economy, while taking into account the reconstruction needs resulting from the full-scale russian invasion.

In particular, the agreement signed on November 10, 2022 in Washington, DC, provides that BlackRock’s Financial Markets Advisory will consult the Ministry of Economy on creation of a roadmap for the implementation of an investment platform, which will primarily attract private capital. This includes the structure of the platform, its mandate and governance.

Thus, the Memorandum formalizes the preliminary discussion of opportunities for attracting public and private investment in Ukraine, which took place in September between President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Chairman and CEO of BlackRock Larry Fink.

“It is very important for us to demonstrate to the whole world that the war does not disallow investment in Ukraine. After all, investments are the key to the future rapid and effective economic recovery. Therefore, we have high expectations for cooperation with BlackRock’s FMA division. We hope that this “recovery platform” will become an effective mechanism for mobilizing investments in key sectors of our economy”, said First Deputy Prime Minister - Minister of Economy of Ukraine Yuliia Svyrydenko after signing the Memorandum.

For reference

BlackRock’s FMA division provides leading expertise in investment and asset management, risk management and technology. It also has extensive experience in advising public sector clients on capital markets.

TRANSLATION:

Ukraine is now officially a de-industrialized black hole farmland owned by BlackRock.

Sovereignty in the arse.

[Phoenix]

https://www.kmu.gov.ua/en/news/minis...paniyeyu-svitu



Sovereignty in the arse.

Is that what Ukraine winning looks like...?

[Phoenix]

Looks like the British have trained them well. But we'll have to see if the Ukrainians can turn this into a foothold for further advances.

The veracity of that story is highly contentious at the moment...

What we are far more certain of is the ever growing push of high ranking US officials in 'nudging' Zelenski in the direction of peace talks.

The need for Ukraine to call up 45+ year old males to fight, the increased scarcity of battlefield necessities like artillery shells (specifically 155 mm howitzer shells) from not US inventory (because their stocks are severely depleted) but South Korean manufacturers, even then the order is for reportedly 100K rounds, in a conflict where the Russians have at times been firing 60K rounds/day, 100K for Ukraine is minuscule to their total requirements to keep fighting.

Meanwhile the Russians are about to incorporate between 100K to 200K well trained and well equipped men of fighting age into the conflict.

[Risto the Great]

Is that what Ukraine winning looks like...?

It's what USA winning looks like. (No matter the outcome in Ukraine)

[Vangelovski]

Russian forces in certain positions along the frontline are at their most vulnerable at the moment.

We agree on something.

Russia buying hardware from other nations is not new, all militaries during conflicts do the same...why wouldn't Russia take advantage of cheap drones from Iran if they're effective and/or need to be tested and evaluated in a conflict zone?

Russia has long claimed that it is self-sufficient in its military industrial capabilities. Many analysts also assumed it was too. But its wartime production capacity hasn't been tested since WWII.

I read something today that Ukraine will be getting artillery shells from South Korea...many sources are claiming that the US military is stretched to resupply the Ukrainians with everything that they need. Even in the latest $400M instalment the number of artillery shells supplied by the US was good for less than a week of fighting.

Yes and Ukraine has never claimed it was self-sufficient in its war production needs.

Once again I think the Russian industrial military complex is better geared to resupply than the US is at the moment.

The two are lightyears apart. Besides, the US wartime production capacity has been tested over and over and over and has delivered every time.

The veracity of that story is highly contentious at the moment...

Yes, we'll need a few days before anything is confirmed.

The need for Ukraine to call up 45+ year old males to fight,

Its pretty standard to mobilize all men, 18-60, during an existential threat. Do you have a link?

the increased scarcity of battlefield necessities like artillery shells

Do you have a source for that?

in a conflict where the Russians have at times been firing 60K rounds/day

I've seen hugely varying numbers on this, but the two armies are using very different tactics. The Ukrainian army is actually using highly mobile and creative maneuvers, while the Russians don't seem to have moved on from WWI and so far they've only come up with the same old and predictive idea of shelling for a few hours and then sending in the infantry and armour.

The Ukrainians have actually learned and applied combined arms maneuvers, whereas the Russians seem to think that combined arms means using each in turn in a predictive pattern that has been around for 100 years. They seem to have failed to understand that combined arms maneuvers require the use of different combat arms simultaneously and creatively to defeat the enemy.

Meanwhile the Russians are about to incorporate between 100K to 200K well trained and well equipped men of fighting age into the conflict.

We have very different definitions of "well trained" and "well equipped".