|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On November 13 2023 09:11 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2023 08:28 Dan HH wrote:On November 13 2023 07:41 KwarK wrote:
Ukraine still hasn’t touched any of the other pipelines. If the argument is that Ukraine wanted to interfere with Russia’s gas sales then we need to find an explanation for why Ukraine isn’t interfering with Russian gas sales. I’m not seeing the motive for them to sabotage the single hardest pipeline to get to and not, for example, just openly cancel the transit agreements as is their prerogative. According to Ukrtransgaz in 2011, Ukraine alone will lose natural gas transit fees of up to $720 million per year from Nord Stream 1.
According to the Naftogaz chairman in 2019, Ukraine will lose $3 billion per year of natural gas transit fees from Nord Stream 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream_1#Economic_aspects But there was no gas going through Nord Stream 2 and so no loss of revenue. Russia had already throttled NS1 and wasn’t using NS2. The hypothetical loss of transit fees is assuming a hypothetical level of transit that wasn’t happening.
Right, but that wasn't always going to be the case. And when the war were to end, they would lose the opportunity to use the fog to do something about this thorn in their side.
I'm not sure of it, I wouldn't bet on it or anything, but to me it's highly plausible. No one was hurt more by the existence of NS than Ukraine. They know the spice must flow and of course they'd rather get a cut from it and have the ability to hold it hostage if necessary, rather than just get completely bypassed.
|
United States43991 Posts
That makes sense as a motive, though one has to wonder what scenario that would apply in. If Ukraine won a resounding victory then Russia would presumably not be welcomed back into the European family of nations and allowed to resume its critical position as a gas supplier. If Russia won a resounding victory then Ukraine would be Russia and the question would be moot.
We need a situation in which the interests of Russia and Ukraine are opposed but Russia is not a pariah.
|
It appears the Dnipro situation continues to grow and become more of just a minor headache for Russia. We know Ukrainian armor successfully crossed the river earlier last week.
|
My theory is next ukrainian offensive will use F16 to deny russian aircraft/helicopters and do an offensive across dnipro.
|
On November 13 2023 23:08 sertas wrote:
My theory is next ukrainian offensive will use F16 to deny russian aircraft/helicopters and do an offensive across dnipro.
What 'next offensive'? With what resources? What manpower? Where will the equipment come from? Forcing the Dnieper?
This time last year while Bahmut was ramping up every pundit was going on about a winter offensive, that became a spring offensive, which started finally in the summer and we all saw what a disaster that turned out to be.
The difference between now and back then is that back then there were plenty of battle hardened elite squads that were sent to buy time for the counteroffensive at bahmut and got chewed up by wagner artillery / urban assults. Back then the AFU still had soldiers and heavy armaments to send. Even though a lot of them were from territorial defense brigades they were still soldiers with some amount of training.
At this point they are extremely short on heavy armaments, and most trained regiments have been decimated in the counteroffensive, so they most likely will be unable to prevent a real encirclement of Avdeevka even with the massive reinforcements being sent in from other parts of the front line, months of progress has already been reversed in days around Bahmut/Artemovsk because those troops were shifted to Avdeevka.
Bahmut, even with the terrible losses at least bought time for the NATO trained army to have its shot, but what is Avdeevka buying time for? F16s? Its a good platform for launching missiles but eh, all the other game changers are burning in a ditch somewhere by this point. Useful equipment without a doubt, but they didnt change the game.
The Russians have built up a large stockpile of cruise missiles and obviously are going to start targeting the UKR energy grid before winter and will probably use it to sow chaos before a big push.
2024 is an election year in the US. It will be interesting to see what kind of exit Washington wants and wether it can be done before next November. The clues will be in the reporting of the corporate media and what they will be told to write
|
Another German aid package to Ukraine, think this is second or third in as many weeks.
|
On November 14 2023 19:41 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2023 23:08 sertas wrote:
My theory is next ukrainian offensive will use F16 to deny russian aircraft/helicopters and do an offensive across dnipro. What 'next offensive'? With what resources? What manpower? Where will the equipment come from? Forcing the Dnieper? This time last year while Bahmut was ramping up every pundit was going on about a winter offensive, that became a spring offensive, which started finally in the summer and we all saw what a disaster that turned out to be. The difference between now and back then is that back then there were plenty of battle hardened elite squads that were sent to buy time for the counteroffensive at bahmut and got chewed up by wagner artillery / urban assults. Back then the AFU still had soldiers and heavy armaments to send. Even though a lot of them were from territorial defense brigades they were still soldiers with some amount of training. At this point they are extremely short on heavy armaments, and most trained regiments have been decimated in the counteroffensive, so they most likely will be unable to prevent a real encirclement of Avdeevka even with the massive reinforcements being sent in from other parts of the front line, months of progress has already been reversed in days around Bahmut/Artemovsk because those troops were shifted to Avdeevka. Bahmut, even with the terrible losses at least bought time for the NATO trained army to have its shot, but what is Avdeevka buying time for? F16s? Its a good platform for launching missiles but eh, all the other game changers are burning in a ditch somewhere by this point. Useful equipment without a doubt, but they didnt change the game. The Russians have built up a large stockpile of cruise missiles and obviously are going to start targeting the UKR energy grid before winter and will probably use it to sow chaos before a big push. 2024 is an election year in the US. It will be interesting to see what kind of exit Washington wants and wether it can be done before next November. The clues will be in the reporting of the corporate media and what they will be told to write
Why do you call it a disaster. To me, it seems the damage suffered by Ukrainian was limited and that if they chose not to blow up on a minefield, it might be smart.
Also communication bragging about a crazy counterattack in the summer may have achieved a more expensive mining and fortifying of very large areas. This can be a smart move as well. You know, straight out of Sun Tzu's playbook.
While it would have been glorious to call it out and execute, seems like the reality is an attrition war has been setting itself up, and it's been months since no one except you have talked about a counteroffensive.
It's really weird because it feels like we have been discussing it, but I tried to look up a bit, and apart from zeo talking about it, it has not really been a subject of discussion, a little bit of answering. Could we move on?
|
United States43991 Posts
On November 14 2023 23:34 0x64 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2023 19:41 zeo wrote:On November 13 2023 23:08 sertas wrote:
My theory is next ukrainian offensive will use F16 to deny russian aircraft/helicopters and do an offensive across dnipro. What 'next offensive'? With what resources? What manpower? Where will the equipment come from? Forcing the Dnieper? This time last year while Bahmut was ramping up every pundit was going on about a winter offensive, that became a spring offensive, which started finally in the summer and we all saw what a disaster that turned out to be. The difference between now and back then is that back then there were plenty of battle hardened elite squads that were sent to buy time for the counteroffensive at bahmut and got chewed up by wagner artillery / urban assults. Back then the AFU still had soldiers and heavy armaments to send. Even though a lot of them were from territorial defense brigades they were still soldiers with some amount of training. At this point they are extremely short on heavy armaments, and most trained regiments have been decimated in the counteroffensive, so they most likely will be unable to prevent a real encirclement of Avdeevka even with the massive reinforcements being sent in from other parts of the front line, months of progress has already been reversed in days around Bahmut/Artemovsk because those troops were shifted to Avdeevka. Bahmut, even with the terrible losses at least bought time for the NATO trained army to have its shot, but what is Avdeevka buying time for? F16s? Its a good platform for launching missiles but eh, all the other game changers are burning in a ditch somewhere by this point. Useful equipment without a doubt, but they didnt change the game. The Russians have built up a large stockpile of cruise missiles and obviously are going to start targeting the UKR energy grid before winter and will probably use it to sow chaos before a big push. 2024 is an election year in the US. It will be interesting to see what kind of exit Washington wants and wether it can be done before next November. The clues will be in the reporting of the corporate media and what they will be told to write Why do you call it a disaster. To me, it seems the damage suffered by Ukrainian was limited and that if they chose not to blow up on a minefield, it might be smart. Also communication bragging about a crazy counterattack in the summer may have achieved a more expensive mining and fortifying of very large areas. This can be a smart move as well. You know, straight out of Sun Tzu's playbook. While it would have been glorious to call it out and execute, seems like the reality is an attrition war has been setting itself up, and it's been months since no one except you have talked about a counteroffensive. It's really weird because it feels like we have been discussing it, but I tried to look up a bit, and apart from zeo talking about it, it has not really been a subject of discussion, a little bit of answering. Could we move on?
Did you miss when the challenger hit a mine?
Absolute disaster.
|
On November 14 2023 23:34 0x64 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2023 19:41 zeo wrote:On November 13 2023 23:08 sertas wrote:
My theory is next ukrainian offensive will use F16 to deny russian aircraft/helicopters and do an offensive across dnipro. What 'next offensive'? With what resources? What manpower? Where will the equipment come from? Forcing the Dnieper? This time last year while Bahmut was ramping up every pundit was going on about a winter offensive, that became a spring offensive, which started finally in the summer and we all saw what a disaster that turned out to be. The difference between now and back then is that back then there were plenty of battle hardened elite squads that were sent to buy time for the counteroffensive at bahmut and got chewed up by wagner artillery / urban assults. Back then the AFU still had soldiers and heavy armaments to send. Even though a lot of them were from territorial defense brigades they were still soldiers with some amount of training. At this point they are extremely short on heavy armaments, and most trained regiments have been decimated in the counteroffensive, so they most likely will be unable to prevent a real encirclement of Avdeevka even with the massive reinforcements being sent in from other parts of the front line, months of progress has already been reversed in days around Bahmut/Artemovsk because those troops were shifted to Avdeevka. Bahmut, even with the terrible losses at least bought time for the NATO trained army to have its shot, but what is Avdeevka buying time for? F16s? Its a good platform for launching missiles but eh, all the other game changers are burning in a ditch somewhere by this point. Useful equipment without a doubt, but they didnt change the game. The Russians have built up a large stockpile of cruise missiles and obviously are going to start targeting the UKR energy grid before winter and will probably use it to sow chaos before a big push. 2024 is an election year in the US. It will be interesting to see what kind of exit Washington wants and wether it can be done before next November. The clues will be in the reporting of the corporate media and what they will be told to write Why do you call it a disaster. To me, it seems the damage suffered by Ukrainian was limited and that if they chose not to blow up on a minefield, it might be smart. Also communication bragging about a crazy counterattack in the summer may have achieved a more expensive mining and fortifying of very large areas. This can be a smart move as well. You know, straight out of Sun Tzu's playbook. While it would have been glorious to call it out and execute, seems like the reality is an attrition war has been setting itself up, and it's been months since no one except you have talked about a counteroffensive. It's really weird because it feels like we have been discussing it, but I tried to look up a bit, and apart from zeo talking about it, it has not really been a subject of discussion, a little bit of answering. Could we move on? Your asking why someone who consistently spouts Russian propaganda is spouting Russian propaganda.
|
On November 14 2023 23:52 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2023 23:34 0x64 wrote:On November 14 2023 19:41 zeo wrote:On November 13 2023 23:08 sertas wrote:
My theory is next ukrainian offensive will use F16 to deny russian aircraft/helicopters and do an offensive across dnipro. What 'next offensive'? With what resources? What manpower? Where will the equipment come from? Forcing the Dnieper? This time last year while Bahmut was ramping up every pundit was going on about a winter offensive, that became a spring offensive, which started finally in the summer and we all saw what a disaster that turned out to be. The difference between now and back then is that back then there were plenty of battle hardened elite squads that were sent to buy time for the counteroffensive at bahmut and got chewed up by wagner artillery / urban assults. Back then the AFU still had soldiers and heavy armaments to send. Even though a lot of them were from territorial defense brigades they were still soldiers with some amount of training. At this point they are extremely short on heavy armaments, and most trained regiments have been decimated in the counteroffensive, so they most likely will be unable to prevent a real encirclement of Avdeevka even with the massive reinforcements being sent in from other parts of the front line, months of progress has already been reversed in days around Bahmut/Artemovsk because those troops were shifted to Avdeevka. Bahmut, even with the terrible losses at least bought time for the NATO trained army to have its shot, but what is Avdeevka buying time for? F16s? Its a good platform for launching missiles but eh, all the other game changers are burning in a ditch somewhere by this point. Useful equipment without a doubt, but they didnt change the game. The Russians have built up a large stockpile of cruise missiles and obviously are going to start targeting the UKR energy grid before winter and will probably use it to sow chaos before a big push. 2024 is an election year in the US. It will be interesting to see what kind of exit Washington wants and wether it can be done before next November. The clues will be in the reporting of the corporate media and what they will be told to write Why do you call it a disaster. To me, it seems the damage suffered by Ukrainian was limited and that if they chose not to blow up on a minefield, it might be smart. Also communication bragging about a crazy counterattack in the summer may have achieved a more expensive mining and fortifying of very large areas. This can be a smart move as well. You know, straight out of Sun Tzu's playbook. While it would have been glorious to call it out and execute, seems like the reality is an attrition war has been setting itself up, and it's been months since no one except you have talked about a counteroffensive. It's really weird because it feels like we have been discussing it, but I tried to look up a bit, and apart from zeo talking about it, it has not really been a subject of discussion, a little bit of answering. Could we move on? Your asking why someone who consistently spouts Russian propaganda is spouting Russian propaganda.
Yeah, I know, but he is saying "We all saw what disaster that turned out to be". We can reminds him, he was alone seeing this.
Poll: The summer counteroffensive was a disasterYou must be logged in to vote in this poll. ☐ Yes
☐ No
|
Croatia9538 Posts
In terms of goals expected versus goals achieved, it could be classified as a "disaster" imo. The expectations were very high and optimistic, but Ukraine realized early on that it can't just throw bodies at a problem, so thankfully losses were comparatively lower than Russia's offensives.
|
A disaster would be to go in and get steamrolled by a counter attack.
Now it's a stalement in a slightly better position for Ukraine than it was before the offensive. While not "glorious victory" it's far from a disaster by any measurment.
|
Calling it a disaster is strong wording since it has had small impact on the future war progress. Calling it a success would be just as faulty. It did not achieve its set out goals.
|
Offensive was a defeat, lets not sugar it.
It was not even limited succes like the summer Kherson offensive last year, that Russian screamed it ended with failure, except it did a shallow, but serious breaches in russian front. Even when it stalled, it was a good point to continue once the Russians were defeated on Izyum-Kupyansk and the attacks on logistics took the toll.
Here, there is no prospect of farther success in forseeble future.
|
On November 15 2023 01:15 hitthat wrote:
Offensive was a defeat, lets not sugar it.
The russian propaganda line we're discussing is if it was a "disaster" or not. I don't think its controversial to say it failed but calling it a disaster is wrong. A disaster would be having the Russians take back the Kharkiv territories they lost during bakhmut or taking Kherson back.
|
An 'offensive' which was mandated and which goals were set by twitter mob. I wouldn't concern myself too much with that.
|
|
|
On November 15 2023 02:31 JimmiC wrote:
I find the whole discussion as a turn based game strange. Land has barely moved so in that way it’s not a very offensive offence. But do you not almost always lose way more troops and equipment trying to take land than defending it?
If this wasn’t labeled as Ukraine offensive and you just looked at the maps and the losses you would say that Ukraine had a very effective summer defensive holding off the much bigger Russian army making marginal gains. Maybe from a percentage standpoint it does not look as good?
It is still crazy to me that we went from Russia taking Kiev in a week to bragging that the Ukrainians are not taking land back and losing only a small fraction of what Russia does. Because for this war to end Ukraine needs to do more then just hold.
|
On November 15 2023 02:31 JimmiC wrote:
I find the whole discussion as a turn based game strange. Land has barely moved so in that way it’s not a very offensive offence. But do you not almost always lose way more troops and equipment trying to take land than defending it?
If this wasn’t labeled as Ukraine offensive and you just looked at the maps and the losses you would say that Ukraine had a very effective summer defensive holding off the much bigger Russian army making marginal gains. Maybe from a percentage standpoint it does not look as good?
It is still crazy to me that we went from Russia taking Kiev in a week to bragging that the Ukrainians are not taking land back and losing only a small fraction of what Russia does.
That's how the situation has evolved. In march 2022, Ukrainian losing Andiivka would not make a big noise in media, that was a time when everyone was scared about losing Kharkiv and Odessa, and the Russians did insane progress on the south that ended with siege of Mariupol. Now we see a fierce combat for a 70k-inhabitant town, and the progress that in march 2022 would be considered a stalemate is now called "advancing".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
