6 ms·

Perhaps the bear isn't as healthy as had been supposed. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/03/the-universal-boosting-of-putin/ https://www.craigmurra

Perhaps the bear isn't as healthy as had been supposed. https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/03/the-universal-boosting-of-putin/ https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/03/the-universa...

kidme5 5y ago
Good to see a take that isn't binary. Hopefully this is the end of Putin's government and the ease of collapse helps us realize our conjured threats for "defense" funding are only making the world less safe.
NicoJuicy 5y ago
What they say and do are 2 different things. In 2010 or 2012 a large gas supply was found and Crimea was at the center of it. Putin doesn't like the alternative solution for Europe and moved in to occupy Crimea as fast as possible. Ukraine cut off water supply to the invaders. They were getting dry. And now he is looking for an excuse to invade a country. NATO is a defensive measure, not an offensive one. Putin is a bully that wants to keep his hold over Europe. Nothing more, nothing less.
ncmncm 5y ago
Wishful thinking has never worked very well, where Russia was involved. It might be that the slow-rolled advance on Kyiv is meant to draw units away from the southern front Putin actually cares about.
- starwind 5y ago
  Unlikely. The Russian’s have struggled logistically almost from the start. Within a day-or-two of the invasion there were numerous reports of Russian tank units walking around on foot looking for diesel. This is consistent with the convoy looking like it’s struggling with mechanical and fuel problems. Those soldiers can’t have much food left. The Russian’s also wouldn’t park themselves like that. They don’t have air dominance and from the numerous Ukrainian air strikes, it doesn’t seem like they have much idea of what’s above them at any given time. (They’re parked close together to stay under the umbrella of anti-aircraft weaponry.) The longer the convoy waits, the more time the Ukrainians have to prep to shell the convoy or hit it from the air.
  - syntheweave 5y ago
    Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine. The daily advancement rate of the convoy is right at their by-the-book limit - it just takes time to advance an operation on the ground, and this is why airfields were targeted early on in a bid to accelerate deployment; media reports of a "slow" advance are just unrealistic analysis. This goes for other questions about the campaign. As a large conscript force still basically using the Soviet model, weak troops are often thrown into the fire early on to soften opposition. Likewise, reliance on artillery is a byproduct of the air force being stretched thin and not reinvesting in new equipment: air dominance and precision bombing missions are expensive, and Russia's military primarily focuses on maintaining its own sovereignty, thus most of the allocation is towards a defensive air war with support provided by ground-based rockets and shelling. However, there are severe challenges still to be reckoned with, which support the idea of Russia remaining on the back foot. The reports of abandoned vehicles, disorganized troops and stretched supplies hold some credence; again, as a conscript army it's harder to pursue delegation of responsibility like a professional force. You are getting relatively less out of more troops simply due to lack of coordination. As well, Ukraine has a smaller force but has been spurred to rearm with the assistance of foreign aid and equipment since the 2014 invasion, getting access to some of the best technologies and training of NATO forces. So Ukraine has some significant battlefield advantages, and with the cutoffs to supply chains on Russia's end, from my viewpoint, while a Russian victory could still occur if they rout the forces in major cities, a slow, protracted conflict will definitely end in Russian defeat at significant cost to civilians. The next weeks will be critical.
    - esperent 5y ago
      > Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine That is statement begging for a source. Do you have one? What is Russia's "known doctrine"?
      - Khaine 5y ago
        I do. War on the Rocks had an article about Russian Logistics[1] which mentions that: "The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades." Task and Purpose has been doing some videos on the war in Ukraine, and they use that article to evaluate Russia's progress against those supply limitations[2], and basically it all lines up that Russian progress has been constrained by supply, and that the current pause is likely because of the next actions they will take[3]. [1] https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM
- jollybean 5y ago
  Highly unlikely. 1) Objectives were a rapid decapitation strike, air supremacy, and major incursions on several fronts, grabbing several cities. 2) His own forces are getting drawn out and mauled. Ukranians are just not losing units at the same rate. 3) Either way, momentum matters and Russians don't have it. That said, they do have a lot of fodder to throw at Ukraine. It seems likely that Ukraine can defend themselves if they are very effectively supported by the West on many fronts, but otherwise the Bear will just slowly suffocate them even as it looses a lot of blood itself. Every anyone with military experience sees that column they have to be salivating. Has there ever been a time in history when there has been several divisions of units just sitting there, out in the open, waiting to be attacked. My gosh.
  - blip54321 5y ago
    Why do you believe Ukraine isn't losing units at the same rate? Pentagon estimates Russia lost 3-5% and Ukraine 10% of their capacity.
    - aliswe 5y ago
      Those percentages might translate to a higher absolute number rate for the russians though, and we dont know how fast those rates are progressing either.
    - jollybean 5y ago
      The reports make it seem like that. There is a public source that lists all publicly available sourced vehicles destroyed (i.e. images via Twitter) and it's very lopsided, that said, we are aware the Russian may not be posting vids of of their wins. Specifically, the Russians need and want propaganda badly, and what they are showing in their own propaganda is minimal. It's the 'fog of war' surely, and it's possible Ukranian losses are worse than we think ... but not matter what the reality is, Ukranian 'wins' are unprecedented. We know for sure what the 'minimum' looks like and even that is bad for Russia.
      - ncmncm 5y ago
- zacharykatsnel 5y ago
  Am I the only one that doesn't understand why people are saying the invasion has gone slowly for Russia? Tanks cannot go at the speed of narratives. Even the invasion of Poland took over a month and they were invaded from both sides by gigantic modern militaries. Ukraine is the second largest country in all of Europe and Russia has captured quite a substantial part of it already. Even half a year to capture all of Ukraine would be an incredible military accomplishment.
xenadu02 5y ago
The agencies competent enough to know (or guess) certainly aren't going to tell anyone. It is absolutely possible to get high on your own supply (of authoritarianism, propaganda, and shooting messengers). So it is entirely possible upper echelons of the Russian Military tell Putin what he wants to hear because anyone who doesn't gets an unscheduled dose of Polonium. It is also possible they are deliberately slow-rolling for various reasons: legitimate supply line issues, testing the waters, being able to pull back if the west responds too strongly, they really just wanted to steal some territory, etc. Being an opportunist is hardly unique. Perhaps the plan was to invade. If you take the capital within a few days yay: you annexed Ukraine and you'll be done and it will be old news before the west can really respond. If the west sends aircraft carriers and troops you claim you were just protecting ethnic Russians in the border areas. If the invasion bogs down or the economic cost gets too high sign a peace treaty that contains as much as you can get away with and play nice neighbor for a bit while you send in the undercover agents to try another regime change in 5-10 years when everyone has stopped paying attention. Russia, much like the US, hasn't really faced off against a reasonably modern military with good training and decent weapons systems anytime in the recent past. Even though Ukraine has a smaller military they've been pouring a lot of effort into training, arming, and modernizing since the last time Russian decided to invade and take some territory in 2014. And it wasn't like they were rag-tag religious extremists or a guerrilla force prior to that - they weren't starting from zero. If Putin and his cronies really did overestimated Russian military capabilities it is still entirely possible for Russia to win the same way the Soviets survived the Wehrmacht: Massive mobilization, throw bodies into the fire, then slowly slog it out for as many years as it takes. That is an option Ukraine doesn't really have. They can't mobilize the same level of industrial production and they can't sustain as many dead sons. No one really knows if top of the line western weapons would level the playing field vs what Russia's defense industry can make. In the end it might come down to will: does Putin have the will to kill as many Russian soldiers as it takes? Would the rest of his cronies let him if he tried? Will the Russian military accept that? On the Ukrainian side how far are they willing to go? How many citizens will volunteer? How many modern western weapons can they get ahold of? Can they continue disrupting Russian communications and logistics? As far as I know this is the closest to a true military faceoff using modern weapons and tactics as we've seen. Most recent conflicts have been very asymmetric at every level which doesn't make for apt comparisons.

kidme5 5y ago

Good to see a take that isn't binary. Hopefully this is the end of Putin's government and the ease of collapse helps us realize our conjured threats for "defense" funding are only making the world less safe.

NicoJuicy 5y ago

What they say and do are 2 different things. In 2010 or 2012 a large gas supply was found and Crimea was at the center of it. Putin doesn't like the alternative solution for Europe and moved in to occupy Crimea as fast as possible. Ukraine cut off water supply to the invaders. They were getting dry. And now he is looking for an excuse to invade a country. NATO is a defensive measure, not an offensive one. Putin is a bully that wants to keep his hold over Europe. Nothing more, nothing less.

ncmncm 5y ago

Wishful thinking has never worked very well, where Russia was involved. It might be that the slow-rolled advance on Kyiv is meant to draw units away from the southern front Putin actually cares about.

starwind 5y ago
Unlikely. The Russian’s have struggled logistically almost from the start. Within a day-or-two of the invasion there were numerous reports of Russian tank units walking around on foot looking for diesel. This is consistent with the convoy looking like it’s struggling with mechanical and fuel problems. Those soldiers can’t have much food left. The Russian’s also wouldn’t park themselves like that. They don’t have air dominance and from the numerous Ukrainian air strikes, it doesn’t seem like they have much idea of what’s above them at any given time. (They’re parked close together to stay under the umbrella of anti-aircraft weaponry.) The longer the convoy waits, the more time the Ukrainians have to prep to shell the convoy or hit it from the air.
- syntheweave 5y ago
  Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine. The daily advancement rate of the convoy is right at their by-the-book limit - it just takes time to advance an operation on the ground, and this is why airfields were targeted early on in a bid to accelerate deployment; media reports of a "slow" advance are just unrealistic analysis. This goes for other questions about the campaign. As a large conscript force still basically using the Soviet model, weak troops are often thrown into the fire early on to soften opposition. Likewise, reliance on artillery is a byproduct of the air force being stretched thin and not reinvesting in new equipment: air dominance and precision bombing missions are expensive, and Russia's military primarily focuses on maintaining its own sovereignty, thus most of the allocation is towards a defensive air war with support provided by ground-based rockets and shelling. However, there are severe challenges still to be reckoned with, which support the idea of Russia remaining on the back foot. The reports of abandoned vehicles, disorganized troops and stretched supplies hold some credence; again, as a conscript army it's harder to pursue delegation of responsibility like a professional force. You are getting relatively less out of more troops simply due to lack of coordination. As well, Ukraine has a smaller force but has been spurred to rearm with the assistance of foreign aid and equipment since the 2014 invasion, getting access to some of the best technologies and training of NATO forces. So Ukraine has some significant battlefield advantages, and with the cutoffs to supply chains on Russia's end, from my viewpoint, while a Russian victory could still occur if they rout the forces in major cities, a slow, protracted conflict will definitely end in Russian defeat at significant cost to civilians. The next weeks will be critical.
  - esperent 5y ago
    > Most of these things fall within Russia's known doctrine That is statement begging for a source. Do you have one? What is Russia's "known doctrine"?
    - Khaine 5y ago
      I do. War on the Rocks had an article about Russian Logistics[1] which mentions that: "The Russian army does not have enough trucks to meet its logistic requirement more than 90 miles beyond supply dumps. To reach a 180-mile range, the Russian army would have to double truck allocation to 400 trucks for each of the material-technical support brigades." Task and Purpose has been doing some videos on the war in Ukraine, and they use that article to evaluate Russia's progress against those supply limitations[2], and basically it all lines up that Russian progress has been constrained by supply, and that the current pause is likely because of the next actions they will take[3]. [1] https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKFSK_9e-g4 [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5BAZ2bBUzM
jollybean 5y ago
Highly unlikely. 1) Objectives were a rapid decapitation strike, air supremacy, and major incursions on several fronts, grabbing several cities. 2) His own forces are getting drawn out and mauled. Ukranians are just not losing units at the same rate. 3) Either way, momentum matters and Russians don't have it. That said, they do have a lot of fodder to throw at Ukraine. It seems likely that Ukraine can defend themselves if they are very effectively supported by the West on many fronts, but otherwise the Bear will just slowly suffocate them even as it looses a lot of blood itself. Every anyone with military experience sees that column they have to be salivating. Has there ever been a time in history when there has been several divisions of units just sitting there, out in the open, waiting to be attacked. My gosh.
- blip54321 5y ago
  Why do you believe Ukraine isn't losing units at the same rate? Pentagon estimates Russia lost 3-5% and Ukraine 10% of their capacity.
  - aliswe 5y ago
    Those percentages might translate to a higher absolute number rate for the russians though, and we dont know how fast those rates are progressing either.
  - jollybean 5y ago
    The reports make it seem like that. There is a public source that lists all publicly available sourced vehicles destroyed (i.e. images via Twitter) and it's very lopsided, that said, we are aware the Russian may not be posting vids of of their wins. Specifically, the Russians need and want propaganda badly, and what they are showing in their own propaganda is minimal. It's the 'fog of war' surely, and it's possible Ukranian losses are worse than we think ... but not matter what the reality is, Ukranian 'wins' are unprecedented. We know for sure what the 'minimum' looks like and even that is bad for Russia.
    - ncmncm 5y ago
zacharykatsnel 5y ago
Am I the only one that doesn't understand why people are saying the invasion has gone slowly for Russia? Tanks cannot go at the speed of narratives. Even the invasion of Poland took over a month and they were invaded from both sides by gigantic modern militaries. Ukraine is the second largest country in all of Europe and Russia has captured quite a substantial part of it already. Even half a year to capture all of Ukraine would be an incredible military accomplishment.

xenadu02 5y ago

The agencies competent enough to know (or guess) certainly aren't going to tell anyone. It is absolutely possible to get high on your own supply (of authoritarianism, propaganda, and shooting messengers). So it is entirely possible upper echelons of the Russian Military tell Putin what he wants to hear because anyone who doesn't gets an unscheduled dose of Polonium. It is also possible they are deliberately slow-rolling for various reasons: legitimate supply line issues, testing the waters, being able to pull back if the west responds too strongly, they really just wanted to steal some territory, etc. Being an opportunist is hardly unique. Perhaps the plan was to invade. If you take the capital within a few days yay: you annexed Ukraine and you'll be done and it will be old news before the west can really respond. If the west sends aircraft carriers and troops you claim you were just protecting ethnic Russians in the border areas. If the invasion bogs down or the economic cost gets too high sign a peace treaty that contains as much as you can get away with and play nice neighbor for a bit while you send in the undercover agents to try another regime change in 5-10 years when everyone has stopped paying attention. Russia, much like the US, hasn't really faced off against a reasonably modern military with good training and decent weapons systems anytime in the recent past. Even though Ukraine has a smaller military they've been pouring a lot of effort into training, arming, and modernizing since the last time Russian decided to invade and take some territory in 2014. And it wasn't like they were rag-tag religious extremists or a guerrilla force prior to that - they weren't starting from zero. If Putin and his cronies really did overestimated Russian military capabilities it is still entirely possible for Russia to win the same way the Soviets survived the Wehrmacht: Massive mobilization, throw bodies into the fire, then slowly slog it out for as many years as it takes. That is an option Ukraine doesn't really have. They can't mobilize the same level of industrial production and they can't sustain as many dead sons. No one really knows if top of the line western weapons would level the playing field vs what Russia's defense industry can make. In the end it might come down to will: does Putin have the will to kill as many Russian soldiers as it takes? Would the rest of his cronies let him if he tried? Will the Russian military accept that? On the Ukrainian side how far are they willing to go? How many citizens will volunteer? How many modern western weapons can they get ahold of? Can they continue disrupting Russian communications and logistics? As far as I know this is the closest to a true military faceoff using modern weapons and tactics as we've seen. Most recent conflicts have been very asymmetric at every level which doesn't make for apt comparisons.