History in the Making: Russian Invasion

Okay, there's fragging and then there's...

fragging.

I wouldn't take the source as gospel but if it's true...

Neidermeyer?

"The main objectives of the first stage of the operation have generally been accomplished," Sergei Rudskoi, head of the Russian General Staff's Main Operational Directorate, said in a speech.

"The combat potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has been considerably reduced, which ... makes it possible to focus our core efforts on achieving the main goal, the liberation of Donbass."

Those were the core efforts, eh?

MadScientistMatt said:

We may be getting some idea of what Putin might be thinking on exit strategy.

Yahoo article: Russia claiming phase 1 of the war is complete

Looks like a variant of the old "throw a dart and paint a bull's eye around it," except the dart hasn't hit yet. The Russians are now claiming their goal was to "liberate Donbas" all along. Whether that is an attainable goal, or they later switch to claiming their goal was to punish the Ukrainians over some real or imagined action and the punishment is complete, remain to be seen.

"Our ultimate goal was to sink a ship in Berdyansk Port so as to make it harder for Ukraine to use the pier to export their bad Nazi vodka. We have now accomplished that mission as planned."

pheller said:

"The main objectives of the first stage of the operation have generally been accomplished," Sergei Rudskoi, head of the Russian General Staff's Main Operational Directorate, said in a speech.

"The combat potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has been considerably reduced, which ... makes it possible to focus our core efforts on achieving the main goal, the liberation of Donbass."

Those were the core efforts, eh?

Aside from the obvious lie, I see this as a potential positive step. It's a way out for Russia. They can say "Hey, all we ever wanted was Donbass" and save at least some face after getting their asses kicked so badly. It's obviously not an ideal outcome for Ukraine, but if it stops the escalation and killing that's been going on for the past few weeks, and enables a peaceful solution without direct involvement from NATO, I think it's a positive.

In reply to Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) :

The Donbass that had a manufactured Russian separatist movement?

Berk 'em.  That is like spitting on someone else's cake and claiming that it was yours all along.

stroker said:

Okay, there's fragging and then there's...

fragging.

I wouldn't take the source as gospel but if it's true...

There's a video of it. I've seen it. I don't speak Russian, but I think this one is a true story.

Pete. (l33t FS) said:

In reply to Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) :

The Donbass that had a manufactured Russian separatist movement?

Berk 'em.  That is like spitting on someone else's cake and claiming that it was yours all along.

I suspect they mean the entire Donbass, not just the part they "had".

That of course could change also, or be what you are referring to... what day is it?....

I'm not entirely sure how much its separatist movement was manufactured, but it certainly wasn't made better by Kyiv's economic isolation of the region. 

The problem Kyiv had with the Donbas region was that the people there didn't really fight back against the Russian operatives, the local politicians didn't turn down the money being offered to them by Russia, and the harder Ukraine's central government pushed, the more the populace of Donbas favored independence and/or more support from Russia. 

Part of this is because those areas are very much culturally Russian, including the language. 

Give up Donbas to stop the destruction, but the current treatment towards Russia better be the new norm and no going back to the old ways of sleeping with the enemy.

Tom_Spangler (Forum Supporter) said:

pheller said:

"The main objectives of the first stage of the operation have generally been accomplished," Sergei Rudskoi, head of the Russian General Staff's Main Operational Directorate, said in a speech.

"The combat potential of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has been considerably reduced, which ... makes it possible to focus our core efforts on achieving the main goal, the liberation of Donbass."

Those were the core efforts, eh?

Aside from the obvious lie, I see this as a potential positive step. It's a way out for Russia. They can say "Hey, all we ever wanted was Donbass" and save at least some face after getting their asses kicked so badly. It's obviously not an ideal outcome for Ukraine, but if it stops the escalation and killing that's been going on for the past few weeks, and enables a peaceful solution without direct involvement from NATO, I think it's a positive.

All joking aside, exactly the point of view I have as well. Give Putin an off-ramp where he can claim victory. Ukraine wasn't ever going to get Crimea back, and work out some way to give Russia part of Luhansk/Donetz (then Ukraine can stop having to keep half their Army there and use it to defend the rest of the country in the future). 

pheller said:

. 

 ...the local politicians didn't turn down the money being offered to them by Russia...  

 

Pretty hard to do when there is no limit to he $$$ offered. Some people rely heavily on that cash for their enterprises.

The real question is what Ukraine's high command does now. Given the choice of letting the Russians scamper off, or bleeding them as they try to redeploy, I'd think that the latter is far more likely. Since anything that moves out of the existing front lines is going to end up in Donbas or Luhansk, why let it escape? Without a concrete agreement, there's zero incentive for the Ukrainians to let the Russians off the hook now. Their efforts have been successful in limiting Russian progress, and even reversing it in some places - I have a feeling they are not going to give Putin the easy out, but will keep pressing until they have a public and guaranteed settlement in hand.

This is similar in principle to the US situation in Vietnam in 1972. It was clear the US was not going to continue, troops were being withdrawn, and the US was looking for a way out. The North Vietnamese played hardball, refusing to allow the "decent interval" that the Nixon administration was seeking. Negotiations with China and the Soviet Union, combined with the Christmas Bombings of Hanoi, eventually pushed the Communists back to the negotiating table. If the Ukrainians maintain pressure, Putin could very well redouble efforts against Ukrainian cities in an effort to achieve a favorable settlement.

Of course there's always the chance that this is all a feint to try to lure the Ukrainian army into redeploying due to have more forces in the east, And then Russia turns around and goes after Kiev again....

I mean after all the same general in the press conference also said that Russia had only lost a thousand troops the whole time, which is at best 5 or 10% of the truth...

In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :

Given how Russian comms seem to be compromised, and the information NATO is feeding them, I'll bet the Ukrainians would figure out a feint before the local Russian commanders did. This feels a lot more like trying to shape the public narrative than feeding false intel to the enemy.

It will be pretty obvious to US surveillance if there any truth to a potential Russian redeployment.  As 02 noted, I will fully expect the Ukrainians to take advantage of any retreats.  E.g. those narrow roads they took to get to the Kyiv area... well....  Any sign of retreat will almost certainly wildly embolden the Ukrainians.

The other issue that 02 is hinting at is that the more success the Ukrainians have, the less likely they are to agree to a truce. There of course is potential for Russia to ramp up general civilian attacks more, but I am pretty sure we can assume that will only make the Ukrainians even less likely to want to come to an agreement.

It is starting to look like there may be a tipping point in the near future, where Ukraine has no interest in a truce.  Something Russia will really want to avoid.

aircooled said:

It is starting to look like there may be a tipping point in the near future, where Ukraine has no interest in a truce.  Something Russia will really want to avoid.

Maybe, and I certainly wouldn't blame them. But the specter of nukes will always be there as long as they are fighting.

In reply to aircooled :

Let me clarify my comments. I do not for a minute believe there is a point at which the Ukrainians will not want a settlement. I strongly believe that, if they are succeeding on the ground and have momentum, that they will have no interest in an unfavorable settlement. Put another way, Ukraine's position is not going to be determined by the extent of civilian casualties or collateral damage, but rather by the military situation and the leverage (or lack thereof) it provides. As I said a while back, Putin is in the briar patch, and there's no compelling reason to help him get out unless he has something meaningful to offer. Time is not on his side.

War is policy by other means (Clausewitz). Russia attempted to use force to achieve policy ends. Ukraine did not choose this path, but it was compelled to follow it, and it now has the opportunity to pursue its own policy objectives. I suspect their threshold is going to be as close to the status quo ante bellum as they can get, denying Russia any gains on the ground. They have already indicated their willingness to declare armed neutrality rather than pursuing NATO membership. It remains to be seen what conditions on the ground will make this seem a plausible set of terms to Putin.

I sure hope all of you guys are right and I am wrong.  Hopefully Vlad the impaler isn't insane.

02Pilot said:

In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :

Given how Russian comms seem to be compromised, and the information NATO is feeding them, I'll bet the Ukrainians would figure out a feint before the local Russian commanders did. This feels a lot more like trying to shape the public narrative than feeding false intel to the enemy.

Probably true. But it's always best to take into account alternate scenarios/assessments, even if they may be less likely. That way you can develop tripwires to act as indicators if the unexpected happens. 

Incidentally, not having alternate assessments and tripwires is almost certainly one of the main reasons Russia's invasion has been such a debacle (in addition to genearal overconfidence and incompetence and a valiant effort by the Ukrainians and allies). They made assumptions about how things would go, and don't seem to have even CONSIDERED that they might not just walk into Ukraine and take over and might need weeks/months of logistics, warm clothing, secure comms, etc.....

irish44j (Forum Supporter) said:

02Pilot said:

In reply to irish44j (Forum Supporter) :

Given how Russian comms seem to be compromised, and the information NATO is feeding them, I'll bet the Ukrainians would figure out a feint before the local Russian commanders did. This feels a lot more like trying to shape the public narrative than feeding false intel to the enemy.

Probably true. But it's always best to take into account alternate scenarios/assessments, even if they may be less likely. That way you can develop tripwires to act as indicators if the unexpected happens. 

Incidentally, not having alternate assessments and tripwires is almost certainly one of the main reasons Russia's invasion has been such a debacle (in addition to genearal overconfidence and incompetence and a valiant effort by the Ukrainians and allies). They made assumptions about how things would go, and don't seem to have even CONSIDERED that they might not just walk into Ukraine and take over and might need weeks/months of logistics, warm clothing, secure comms, etc.....

Oh, without a doubt. I'm not suggesting we ignore every possibility, rather simply that we consider which might be most likely. A feint east, possibly in coordination with a strike from Belarus (which seems caught between a rock and a hard place here), could be in the cards. But I find it difficult to envision a scenario in which the Russians could pull that off without tipping their hand to US and Ukrainian intelligence, given all of their coordination difficulties to date.

02Pilot said:

... But I find it difficult to envision a scenario in which the Russians could pull that off without tipping their hand to US and Ukrainian intelligence, given all of their coordination difficulties to date.

Which interestingly enough brings us full circle to the original reason for this thread: How can an invasion be a surprise, it should be pretty obvious (and of course it was).

I would certainly expect, based on the initial invasion, if there is any sign of potential trickery (which of course is very difficult with armies) the West will make it very clear to everyone.

I am not even sure what the Russians can do to ramp up anymore (ignoring the WMD angle). More missiles? Maybe conventional carpet bombing?  I don't think Russia even has a plane (like th B52) that could do that.  I am pretty sure even the TU-95 (big turboprop bomber) does not have any significant conventional capability (designed to drop large nukes, then modified for cruise missiles).

The bodies are showing up at the mothers doors Put Put..

Boy,had they not blew the berkeley out of the Antonov 225s hangar and totalling the plane out they could have dumped some junk out of that fat piggys trunk!

In reply to aircooled :

They're not dead. They're resting.

Ok for some humor.  These are trending on FB.