Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 170

On July 22 2022 05:24 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Realistically, taking back Kherson will be a very long drawn out affair as long as Russia wants to hold Kherson, which judging that Russian forces have been trying to push out from Kherson as far out as possible, that is the case. Russia had months to supply Kherson and Kherson is their primary supply base in pushing out to take the rest of the Kherson Oblast. Pontoon bridges for either side is not realistic, as long as either side has eyes watching the river bank. Unless there are special forces equipping and training a hitherto hidden Ukrainian resistance, the timeline will be months.

On July 23 2022 01:15 Ghanburighan wrote:


The latest Rainer Saks post this morning gave a time line of a few weeks before we know the result.

The grain deal is interesting, it essentially says that RU lacks the capability to attack UA vessels in a part of UA controlled waters. More details here

https://twitter.com/Mylovanov/status/1550494950927777794

On July 23 2022 02:15 Artesimo wrote:


I find it more believable that russia does this for some other reason, like some buddying up with turkey since they get to take a key role in this. Or trying to gain some goodwill because they actually can't continue their war for much longer. Or maybe they have give in to sanctions... basically anything but 'russia can't attack ukrainian vessels' is more plausible to me.

Russia has a very capable fleet of submarines which are not really affected by the closing of the straits into the black sea for russian warships, and ukraine only has very limited ability to combat them, there is no way they are incapable of attacking the vessels of a nation that is devoid of an functional navy right now...

On July 23 2022 02:24 Simberto wrote:


Dunno, we have not seen that very capable fleet of submarines doing anything so far (granted, they haven't really had the opportunity to do so).

I think we need to be careful in assuming the russian stuff is working and actually capable of doing what it is supposed to. We have no clue what corruption has done to that very capable fleet of submarines.

Moldova on Friday denied Russian Foreign Ministry complaints that it is sabotaging the rotation of Russian troops in breakaway Transnistria and not letting Russia bring modern weaponry to its forces in the region.

“Our country rejects the accusations launched [by Russia], with the explicit mention that cases of non-authorized entry of certain Russian servicemen are related to [Russian] non-compliance with the criteria established in the mechanism.”

“Thus, the entry of the officers of the so-called Operative Group of the Russian Troops, a formation that is illegally on the territory of our country and that violates neutral status, was not allowed,” officials in Chisinau said in a press release.

Moldova reiterated its call for the unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops and ammunition depots from Moldova, including from the breakaway Transnistrian region.

The director of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s second CIS department, Alexey Polishchuk, said on Thursday that Moldova is deliberately blocking the rotation of Russian troops in Transnistria.

“At the airport in Chisinau, Russian officers on their way to Transnistria to fit the Russian contingent on a rotational basis were detained many times without explanation. We consider such actions unfriendly and always react to them accordingly,” he said.

The Deputy Chief of Staff of Russian Land Forces, Igor Sokorenko, on Thursday also accused Moldova of trying to prevent new deliveries of Russian military equipment and equipment to Transnistria.

He said Moldovan authorities are counting on the inevitable wear and tear of the material available to the Russian army in Transnistria.

“This situation is caused by the fact that the Transnistrian section of the state border between Ukraine and Moldova has been closed by the Kyiv authorities and by [their] renunciation of the agreement with Russia on the transit of military units of the Russian Federation and military goods through the territory of Ukraine,” he stated.

On Friday, RIA Novosti published an interview with the breakaway region’s foreign minister, Vitaly Ignatiev, in which he says Transnistria intends to join the Russian Federation.

“The vector of Transnistria has remained unchanged throughout the years of the republic’s existence, which is reflected in the results of the referendum on 17 September 2006, where it is clearly indicated: independence with subsequent free accession to the Russian Federation. The independence of the country is an absolute priority,” Ignatiev said.

Moldova has no longer allowed this rotation of Russian troops since 2015, and has repeatedly asked the UN General Assembly to ensure withdrawal of Russian forces from its territory.

Russia keeps about 1,700 soldiers in the Transnistrian region on the left bank of the Dniester. They are divided into two groups: Russian peacekeepers with a mandate to ensure peace, and Russian soldiers who are part of the Operative Group of the Russian Troops, OGRT.

These do not have a mandate but stay in the region under the pretext of guarding the ammunition depot at Cobasna, where 20,000 tons of ammunition from the time of the Soviet Union are stored.

The Russian military in the OGRT is subordinate to the Western District of the Russian Army, based in St Petersburg. They are viewed as a real danger by both Moldova and Ukraine as the possible source of a surprise attack.

Military sources in Chisinau say the core of the OGRT consists of 70 to 100 Russian officers, the rest being Transnistrian locals employed as Russian soldiers. The Russian peacekeepers and the OGRT military are de facto one and the same. Troops rotate between them once every six months.

On July 23 2022 19:56 Sermokala wrote:
I mean that's what everyone did at the start of the war. If they've budgeted f15s and f16s then Ukraine would have the air superiority to use a10s as the high survivability cas it's intended to be.

And again it is basically free for the west. Idk what the problem with more stuff is.

On July 23 2022 20:24 Magic Powers wrote:
So Russia signed the grain export deal, and their next step is to fire at several Ukrainian ports to be used for said exports?
Is this real?

https://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2022/07/23/7359769/

On July 23 2022 21:12 Sent. wrote:
Wouldn't those A10's be useful in defence, especially in areas in range of Ukrainian AA, where Russians won't be able to easily hunt them down with their jets?

On July 23 2022 21:22 Gorsameth wrote:
I imagine the issue is more mobile SAM then aircraft.

On July 23 2022 21:26 r00ty wrote:
Yes, the western nations in support of Ukraine are not sending their state of the art weapons. I think it's fair to say that goes for everyone, not just the US. It may still be good enough.
As an example, a HIMARS with the most advanced missiles could reliably strike at "Putins palace" near Noworossiysk from the front lines, or any other target up to 500km away.

There's still a fear of overescalating this to the point where the Russian regime might use a nuclear weapon, which i think is warranted. Also there's always the chance of the tech getting into the wrong hands.

On July 23 2022 21:36 Artesimo wrote:
Again, its not about the A10 not being state of the art, its about the US military itself seeing it as not suited for modern peer to peer combat. All those tanks the poles send are not state of the art equipment, but they are invaluable because their profile fit the conflict they were send into. The A10 does not and instead would be send into the complete opposite of what it is suited for.

On July 23 2022 21:57 Manit0u wrote:


Technically the A10 was designed to combat Russian armor and seeing how Russia is sending T-62s to the front now it could potentially be useful. But, like it was already mentioned you need air superiority for that, which Ukrainians currently don't have.

I do wonder however, how capable is Russian AA defence though. Around the towns it seems to work OK seeing how they're shooting down their own Tier 1 planes but I'm not so sure about those troops in the field close to the front lines. Russian brigades were understaffed as is at the beginning of conflict (troop transports with no troops in them etc.) so I would assume their mobile AA capabilities might be limited. Drones fucked them up real good in the early stages of the war so I guess A10 doing some damage is not out of the realm of possibilities.