EPTOn November 28 2025 14:56 ETisME wrote:
some common grounds are being identified now
some common grounds are being identified now
Common ground between Russia and the surrender agreement that Russia dictated is to be expected.
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread - Page 898
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
KwarK
United States43293 Posts
Common ground between Russia and the surrender agreement that Russia dictated is to be expected. | ||
|
ETisME
12586 Posts
On November 28 2025 17:01 RvB wrote: Almost everything I've read says at least two years not one. Any sources for that timeline? It won't be in English. It's from several Taiwanese military analysts pages. Not this one in particular but to give you a rough idea. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17qKZv9hkw/ Their post on the glide bombs are crucial, because it directly translate russia superior air dominance into safe strategic purpose. Not only is Ukraine has notl real means to define the existing ones, Russia is already on an improved version like umpb d-30sn. These will shell shock any Ukraine defense teams into unable to do sustain prolonged war. Further worsening the lack of manpower issue. Loss of pokrovsk also unstablised a lot of areas, making it spread even more thin. Also just to expand on glide bomb vs jamming, it looks like the more anti jamming are on the glide bombs, it is multiples harder to set up strong enough jamming. Based off latest image, the on target accuracy is roughly 30%, but many are close enough to have shellshock effect. | ||
|
ETisME
12586 Posts
On November 28 2025 18:11 KwarK wrote: Common ground between Russia and the surrender agreement that Russia dictated is to be expected. Ukraine worked on the revision. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6326 Posts
On November 28 2025 10:22 ETisME wrote: Hard to say why but I reckon they just want to reshuffle the population on the outskirts of Russia to "resist some of the cultural social changes" from the west Look at Mariupol, it's been reshaped as a strictly very Russian cities. And similarly, a lot of populations been moved around in occupied territories to make it more Russian This is one of the more illogical cope narratives being pushed - the seething over cities being rebuilt and people coming back to them. When rebuilding damaged civilian apartments is being peddled as a war crime you know its a slow news day. Kiev hadn't invested anything into infrastructure or modernisation for decades and just building new things doesn't mean its 'Russian architecture', what are they supposed to do? Build commie blocks so it looks like the rest of Kiev controlled Ukraine? Millions of Ukrainian civilians fled to Russia from 2014 and since 2022. If there is new housing being built in Mariupol and other parts of what was formerly Ukraine I don't see what the problem is with Ukrainian passport holders being given incentives to move there or people from Mariupol moving back to their homes. | ||
|
ETisME
12586 Posts
On November 28 2025 18:55 zeo wrote: This is one of the more illogical cope narratives being pushed - the seething over cities being rebuilt and people coming back to them. When rebuilding damaged civilian apartments is being peddled as a war crime you know its a slow news day. Kiev hadn't invested anything into infrastructure or modernisation for decades and just building new things doesn't mean its 'Russian architecture', what are they supposed to do? Build commie blocks so it looks like the rest of Kiev controlled Ukraine? Millions of Ukrainian civilians fled to Russia from 2014 and since 2022. If there is new housing being built in Mariupol and other parts of what was formerly Ukraine I don't see what the problem is with Ukrainian passport holders being given incentives to move there or people from Mariupol moving back to their homes. I think you are misunderstanding. Mariupol is no longer under Ukraine control. I am saying russia has rebuild it with deukraine ideology and moved pro russian population in. Putin just got this pushed through: Strategy of Russia's national policy in the period to 2036 China has reported how many population have been moving around in Russia. It's definitely not natural movement. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17478 Posts
I've made the lebensraum comparison earlier not by accident. Just like Hitler wanted to occupy central and eastern Europe and get rid of Poles, Jews, Ukrainians etc. and resettle those lands with Germans so does Putin want to do with Ukraine. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6260 Posts
On November 28 2025 18:19 ETisME wrote: It won't be in English. It's from several Taiwanese military analysts pages. Not this one in particular but to give you a rough idea. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17qKZv9hkw/ Their post on the glide bombs are crucial, because it directly translate russia superior air dominance into safe strategic purpose. Not only is Ukraine has notl real means to define the existing ones, Russia is already on an improved version like umpb d-30sn. These will shell shock any Ukraine defense teams into unable to do sustain prolonged war. Further worsening the lack of manpower issue. Loss of pokrovsk also unstablised a lot of areas, making it spread even more thin. Also just to expand on glide bomb vs jamming, it looks like the more anti jamming are on the glide bombs, it is multiples harder to set up strong enough jamming. Based off latest image, the on target accuracy is roughly 30%, but many are close enough to have shellshock effect. Seems very unlikely to me that improved glide bombs will make that much of a difference. It would have to enable Russia to significantly increase their rate of advance into the most fortified area of Ukraine. Pokrovsk is not even lost yet. They've moved at approximately 100 metres a day while concentrating most of their offensive effort on the city. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17478 Posts
On November 28 2025 18:19 ETisME wrote: It won't be in English. It's from several Taiwanese military analysts pages. Not this one in particular but to give you a rough idea. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/17qKZv9hkw/ Their post on the glide bombs are crucial, because it directly translate russia superior air dominance into safe strategic purpose. Not only is Ukraine has notl real means to define the existing ones, Russia is already on an improved version like umpb d-30sn. These will shell shock any Ukraine defense teams into unable to do sustain prolonged war. Further worsening the lack of manpower issue. Loss of pokrovsk also unstablised a lot of areas, making it spread even more thin. Also just to expand on glide bomb vs jamming, it looks like the more anti jamming are on the glide bombs, it is multiples harder to set up strong enough jamming. Based off latest image, the on target accuracy is roughly 30%, but many are close enough to have shellshock effect. Glide bombs are the only advantage Russia has at the moment but it's not crucial at the front because the war hes evolved. There is no "frontline" in the common sense, Ukraine has hidden lookout posts with very few soldiers in them, not engaging and only reporting, spread every few kilometers. Then some foot patrols composed of very small squads. Russia on the other hand is trying to infiltrate small groups of soldiers through those, gather at the rear and secure positions. Russians managed to use bad weather (halting drone operations) to capture some more of Pokrovsk but still the probability of them capturing it by the end of this year is 50/50 at best. Capturing whole of Donetsk within one more year is pretty much an impossible task for the Russians since they are getting more and more problems on their own turf, desertion rates are huge and conscription isn't going as well (sign on bonuses fell from 4 million to a few hundred thousand if they are being paid at all since over half of the Russian regions are now reporting budget deficits). So, Russia is facing increasing problems with replenishing and sustaining its army and Kramatorsk aglomeration is much larger and better defended than Pokrovsk. If it took Russia 1.5 years to still not fully capture Pokrovsk how long do you feel it would take them to capture a tougher target when they have less resources? Putin was really banking on this "peace deal" Russia has pushed since capturing Donetsk was one of the primary goals for this "special operation". If they fail to capture it then it means defeat. They were hoping to get this deal done so they could get it without a fight and use the extra time to rebuild for another invasion. Unfortunately for Putin though Ukrainian people and military made it clear that if Russia can't capture Donetsk by itself they sure won't give it to them for free (their stance is - if you can't take it, we won't give it to you). Edit: To put it differently. In 4 years Russia didn't manage to capture even half of Donetsk. What makes you think that they can capture all of it within 1 more year? | ||
| ||
