texastough

My read is that rather than a true "counter attack," it is more of a withdrawal by whats left of the Russian forces after being mostly decimated

nttawwt

derp

It usually happens mid June so I imagine this weekend is early.

Haven't seen this posted yet. Another shakedown? Anybody heard their reasoning? https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1527034026460061696?s=20&t=113IKSfDQs84fd58VJILqA Edit: apparently they want changes in election law in Bosnia to favor Bosnian Croats, but apparently this is unlikely to hinder Finland/Sweden joining

Yes, rate snake. Good snek. Here's the master thread:

If the number that came out of Azovstal is a big (i.e. 1,000 or so) it has to include not only lots of seriously wounded, but non combat personnel, civilians, etc. No way 1,000 troops would surrender. I'm a bit puzzled because I would think Russia would claim a lower number, so that they would never have to account for them, or it be discovered for instance on a prisoner exchange.

http://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1526641113691570176

Russian quality of life and expectations are so low, I see it as a huge opportunity. Prostrate the country before the world to eventually lift sanctions, then pump O&G money into the country instead of the military and kleptocracy. Seems like low hanging fruit to me.

I’ve been hoping so too. Not only to relieve Mariupol but also to cut off resupply from crimea. A pincer to go with the Kharkiv offensive

They’re not going to push all the way to transnistria, Odesa, or even advance past Kherson either

I think its worth noting that players don't have to "transfer out" since in the days of NIL players can be on "scholarship" without using an official 'ship

reeks in here

forwards or backwards

Justifies sending in "peacekeeping" troops to protect civilians imo

I'm of the opinion that Russia might get to keep Crimea but nothing else. All Ukraine forces need to do is prevent Russia from taking and holding cities. They've mostly done that already. I don't believe Russia has the capability/resources to mount a second offensive anytime soon. If Russia simply digs into defensive positions in the countryside they are fucked. Ukraine won't need to eliminate all those forces, they can just starve them.

I would argue Ukrainian forces should re-deploy south first, to relieve Mariupol, hopefully cut off supply lines coming through Crimea, and avoid being surrounded by russian forces in the east. But I don't know shit

Back to Japan claiming sovereignty over the southern Kuril Islands. Man I wish other countries like Finland who have lost territory to Russia would follow suit. Seems it would be the best way to help Ukraine right now short of direct NATO involvement. Divert Russia's military resources and attention from Ukraine. And, playing the long game, could help take out Putin. I know support for the Ukraine war is strong now, but if Putin came out of this with nothing of value gained in Ukraine, and loss of territory to Japan, Finland, etc., I imagine his support would take a huge hit in the homeland. Combined with sanctions eventually taking a huge toll on Russians, I don't see how Putin could survive it.

Dumb question amnesty for the military guys: are tanks and armored vehicles with big guns considered the "artillery" that is shelling cities? I know the Russians are shooting missiles into cities too, but my impression is that missiles come from long range, and there are far fewer of them, compared to the artillery shelling. I'm asking because when I think artillery, I think of a big gun on wheels. But I haven't seen images from Ukraine of those. I'm assuming the Ukrainians would place higher priority on destroying the artillery that is blasting the cities. In other words, are all the tanks being blown up/captured by Ukraine the main guns doing the shelling?

Don't bother, MaybeATrollOrDumbass thinks Ukraine "picked this fight"

Achinsk is in the middle of Russia, thousands of miles from Ukraine. How would Ukraine accomplish that with missiles?

I think those troop numbers include kia, wounded, captured, etc.

I've been wondering whether anyone has analyzed of the rate of Russian losses, like the OSInt guys or Rob Lee etc. All else being equal, it would seem that as Russia's losses mount, morale degrades, supplies run out etc. the rate of their losses would increase. I know that "all else being equal" is a fiction in the fog of war, as Russia stops advancing and digs in, and so forth. Anyway I decided to look at Ukraine's claimed numbers put out through the Kyiv Indepenent. But, their Twitter only went back to March 12, but thats about halfway through the conflict so it works. Here's what it shows. As of March 12, Ukraine claimed that Russia had lost: 12,000 troops, 58 planes, 83 helicopters, 362 tanks, 585 other vehicles, 1,205 armored personnel carriers, etc As of March 28, Ukraine claimed Russia has lost 17,000 troops, 123 planes, 127 helicopters, 586 tanks, 1,150 other vehicles, 1,694 armored personnel carriers Not a ton to be gleaned from that info, but if that info is true, it would indicate Russia's losses have slowed slightly since March 12.

A couple more with the “get off my lawn” treatment Assuming these just came out of their den, they may come right back. I took them about a mile away. IMG_0377.MOV

Still you have to give credit where credit is due. "Ukrainian border guards undress you and touch you everywhere . . ." Lol thats some entertaining disinfo right there