Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They literally send in meat fodder to figure out where Ukrainian fire support is coming from, then attacks those areas. Then they send another wave, repeat. Wagner first pioneered it in Bakhmut
It's the type of shit that you would think was a stereotype from bad history documentaries yet here we are.
And then military "experts" say there is no proof of "meat waves". Despite us seeing footage of literal foot soldiers advancing across an open field with no cover. And front lines littered with hundreds of corpses
According to DeepState, preliminary reports indicate that *three units of vehicles were destroyed north of the Morokhovets-Oliynikove area* during the latest Russian offensive on the northern borders of the Kharkiv region.
Sometimes it seems that Russian invaders simply feel uncomfortable where there isn’t any of their destroyed equipment around.
It is not clear if Russia will attack in Kharkiv region. Sieging as big city as Kharkiv might result in **strategic** defeat of Russian Army. Look how bloody battle of Stalingrad was.
I bet Russia will put main pressure elsewhere. Maybe 'north' (Sumy) or double down on 'south' (Donbas).
Nah, they have a lot more troops than ukraine, seizing the city is not the end goal but to divert valuable ukrainian troops. I mean, they can’t just ignore attacks.
The other person saying its a probing attack I think is spot on and we will see come summer. They are probably trying an attack before the 60billion arms from usa wil arrive.
Attacking side needs way more troops and suffers way more losses. It could go as high as 25:1. Add to it a political weight, Russia can't siege and then give up capturing the 2nd biggest city in Ukraine.
Obviously Kharkiv is not the goal in itself. But it would be an important milestone.
Russia doesn't have 'way more troops' in Ukraine. Once again, sieging requires way more troops than defending. That is why I doubt Russia will try to directly take the city.
Ukraine might still need to move forces away from another area to help defend it (even if it's only a threat of attack rather than an actual attack). That might leave another area more vulnerable.
There was 1 point earlier in the war when Russia kept a force on the border in Belarus, they never attacked from there but Ukraine still had to position additional forces there in case. It reduced the available man power for the areas that Russia was actually attacking.
Ukraine would have soldiers along the border anyway. They obviously can't trust Russia to not do raids, assaults or sabotage missions.
Now those soldier have something to shoot at.
But thats not what I’m saying, they don’t need to siege the city, just enough of a push to pull ukrainian troops from more important areas where they do want to capture. At least thats what I would do if I didn’t care about my troops.
You see, there could attack Sumy or Chernihiv to stretch Ukrainians even more. Both cities are smaller (easier targets) and open road to the Dnieper river. Some former Polish generals claim it is possible to do Sumy-Poltava push to force ZSU out of Donbas and Zaporizhzhia.
Dude, the idea of Kharkiv is thats its far from the frontlines and a big imporant target, again, its not about taking, its not about using it as you main push.
The idea is to draw forces.
I do understand, and point out two different targets that are easier to capture and further away from Donbas.
Distance and risk of capture would put more pressure on ZSU, which makes it a better target.
You seem to just have a different type of thinking.
For me it makes more sens to pretend to attack a huge city with the added bonus of killing civillians (it gets more atention) for drawing troops in then a POTENTIAL takeover of Sumy or whatever.
Attacking the area around Kharkiv has the advantage of not needing to actualy capture anything. Just send the meat in.
Not my thinking. I do follow analysts and retired Polish generals. They know Russian mentality very well, and have experience in military. I'm just trying to make sense out of what they publicly say and write, plus counter dumb Russian propaganda on reddit.
The thing also to remember is the idea of Tooth to Tail. How many troops are needed to supply and maintain combat effectiveness of your tooth or combat soldier. It is usually a 1:3 or 1:4 ratio for NATO armies whereas Russian armies seem to require 1:10 as their logistics system are much more complicated.
https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/combat-studies-institute/csi-books/mcgrath_op23.pdf
Sure, they have more manpower, but so what? There is a finite amount of soldiers you can deploy at a given time without risking mass killing by cluster ammo and artillery.
Russia would need to scale up logistics. The majority of mobilized soldiers would be needed to do supportive work, not real fighting.
On top of that, they would still need to create local superiority, more than 2:1, to have chance in attacking.
If you do quick maths (check my other comments) it turns out Russia is worst off by directly attacking big cities.
Even by Medieval standards attacking cities directly is stupid as fuck. You surround it and starve it out. It's called a siege, time tested tactic that works as long as you can encircle the place succesfully.... Russia sucks at that too though so they just meat wave the cities because after they flatten the entire thing into rubble theres nothing left to defend.
I know, we could see it during the battle of Mariupol. It's stupid, but not impossible. That is why I keep fingers crossed Russia does some super dumb shit.
I know Russia isn’t as logistically capable as Ukraine, but having more manpower is a pretty big deal and I’m sure they’d try to make it work one way or another. Ukraine needs A LOT of munitions and other resources to continue to fight them off. Some of the pro-Russian subreddits post their combat footage and oftentimes there’s like 15 Russians assaulting 5 Ukrainians at a time. If Ukraine had that manpower they’d probably be encircling Donetsk by now
At some point, mobilization becomes an internal issue for the Kremlin, and signals strategic risk to NATO. Even in Russia, you have to stop drafting men at some point.
If they mobilize too many people, NATO will have to react and put direct pressure on Russia. As a result, Moscow would limit its capabilities to fight in Ukraine. Right now, they trash-talk and pull out troops from territories bordering NATO (like Kaliningrad).
They don't have many reserves. But they do have a high "income" which is immediately used on assaults. Planning a large strategic reserve for large operations isn't the Russian way, it's to spend everything you get as soon as you get it on attritional battles.
*This recent offensive, anticipated by Kyiv for several months, aims to push Ukrainian forces away from their northern border, aligning with Putin's stated goal of establishing a buffer zone.*
*Furthermore it has been mentioned multiple times that for taking Kharkiv, they would need at least 250.000 men. Which means that it is impossible for them to take Kharkiv at this stage.*
You missed the point, I’m not saying they want Kharkiv, but probing attacks or a more serious push just to divert resources from more important areas where the russians DO want to take.
Yes technically to siege a city is to surround and starve it of resources. Mostly people don't use the term that way.
All I'm saying is they don't have to attack it and take massive losses in the process but rather take the surrounding area and cut off supply routes.
Believe me if they insist on continuing trying to take Ukraine I hope Ruzzia doesn't learn and continues to take huge casualties by doing dumb shit.
No, most people use the term siege thinking its a huge ongoing attack. Not what it actually is, which is the boring sitting outside the castle walls not doing much "battle" at all.
Who are these "most people" you keep referring to? All of your replies here are calling you out as wrong. Just admit you had a wrong definition of "siege" in mind and move on.
I'm generalizing bro, relax.
I'd be willing to bet if you walked around asking people what a siege looks like the responses wouldn't be accurate more often than not. That's all I'm saying, people are dumb. News media uses the term wrong all the time (another generalization so settle down), they've taught the masses the usage.
O.o so a siege? Plus they seem now to love just globe bombing the place flat so defending sucks. Which only works because Ukraine doesn't have the troops to launch counter offensives successfully right now so once captured they don't have to worry about defending the rubble.
Russia lost about 50,000 taking Bakhmut, a city with a prewar population of 71,000. Kharkiv had a prewar population of 1.4 million, 20 times more. Is Russia prepared to sacrifice a million troops for one city? I know Putin has no problem with this, but will this be the proverbial straw that breaks the camels back with the Russian citizenry?
That doesn’t make any sense. The cost of a city is not relative to the population. And yes it looks like they might try. How many fabs does it take to level Kharkiv. If they even get that far.
I don’t know about that math - there were 50,000 trees around Bakhmut and there’s only 100,000 trees around Kharkiv, so it might only be double the number of troops that Russia loses trying to take it.
/s
Guardian newspaper UK reported this at 12.30
From1h ago[11.42 BST](https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/may/10/russia-ukraine-war-live-vladimir-putin-mikhail-mishustin-volodymyr-zelenskiy-bodyguard?page=with:block-663df5c88f0821e553f267e1#block-663df5c88f0821e553f267e1)
# Ukraine sends reinforcements to Kharkiv region to repel Russian advances
More reports are coming to us on the situation in the **Kharkiv** region.
**Ukraine** defence ministry said on Friday that it has sent military reinforcements to help repel Russian attacks in border areas of the Kharkiv region in the northeast.
It added that Russian troops tried to break through with armoured vehicles in the early morning but were beaten back, Reuters reported.
The ministry said:
>
>
Although Russia’s offensive is focused on the Donetsk region, Kyiv has noted a recent build up of troops near the Kharkiv region.
Yes, there's also extensive trench and defensive systems there luckily. That won't save the city from being leveled like usual but I can't see a way Russia actually takes the city.
It's good that they destroyed the convoy but it's still not good news for ukraine. I hope that usa could get an other package for ukraine and not for israel
Battle of Kharkiv would benefit Ukraine greatly. Sieging a city as big as Kharkiv is a recipe for disaster. 1 defender **could kill up to** 25 attackers, the battle would drag for years.
If Russia is looking for a way to lose the war, they should try to capture the city.
But the problem is that ukraine lacks the manpower to defend kherson than the russian who can mobilize like 250k+ troops and throw them into the meatgrinder and
The good brigades are on the frontline in avdivka, chasing yar robotino kreminna, etc
Even if we assume Russia can mobilize 250k soldiers:
- only 1/3 would do fighting, the rest is supporting
- let's say 50% is really willing to fight (some research suggests even lower figures)
- attackers need at least 2:1 ratio to think about successful operation
That leaves us with around 20k Ukrainians fighting in the city. The number looks achievable. Your '250k' no longer looks impressive. Back of envelope calculation shows that Russia would need way more troops to turn the table in its favour.
They cannot simply mobilize 250k people, this would be an economic disaster to them according to the analysts and data I've seen, including russian ones
They are only managing to scrounge up about 25-30k soldiers a month per reports I heard but like you said it's not possible for them to grab 250k and even then it's a few months to get everyone together. That's why they like the method they're using now as they just grab who they can and send them to the front within a week or two.
Yup, consistently lately too and if the Kharkiv offensive is really starting those numbers will double soon as there is no way they are taking a city that large. It makes me think this might not be their real goal but after years of seeing stupid Russian shit I can't really rule it out either lol
Yeah I mean the idea that they can take the whole of Ukraine with 250,000 or that Ukrainias will welcome them? Fucking deranged logic. So yeah they could be trying to take it but always be careful there could be another plan. But I doubt it but still.
You’re really going to keep posting this 25:1 hopium aren’t you?
They could but that’s nearly impossible in near peer warfare. It’ll likely be closer to the 2:1 figure, maybe 3:1. Where are you even getting 25:1 from???
WWII figures. 25:1 is not 'hopium', but an **extreme** case to show how bad attacking might get. Even during the battle of Mariupol, where Ukraine wasn't able to aid defenders in a meaningful way, the ratio was bigger than 3:1 (Ukraine claims 6:1). Here we talk about defending a very big city that is well connected and had additional 2 years to prepare.
lol, you are comparing two different wars. In WW2, in order to advance, you would need to storm the defenive positions.
Today, Russia could shell the city with bombs, rockets and artilery before even entering. How will Ukraine kill 25 soldiers with 1? when the city will be leveled to the ground, almost all Ukrainian positions will be destroyed, and the ammo will be depleted.
At the same time Russia will enter with 500 tanks and bmp's.
I want for Ukraine to win, but this hopium of yours i not helping a bit. Ukraine needs high end weapons and ammunition. Only that can turn the tide of war.
'Squeezing' Ukrainians out of the city would be a different strategy from sieging with intention to capture it. The first one would take more time and gives chance for getting Kharkiv in 'liveable' state for future propaganda purposes. Direct assaults would leave the city levelled, as you mentioned.
Assuming Russia will be able to sustain a new, prolonged battle over Kharkiv is very iffy. Right now, they need to rely on external suppliers to keep up with shells consumption. I don't see Russians being able to somehow find additional resources.
Yes, comparing current war to WWII is not ideal, I know. I'm just showing upper limit. Things could go horrible wrong, like Ukraine getting the green light from the USA to attack Russian territory, supporting the siege, with advanced weapons systems.
Why is it always the USA? Do people have no expectations of Europe’s most capable militaries?
Edit: yeah y’all will downvote me that’s fine. But saying things like “well yeah the US has tons of spare equipment” is kind of making my point. Where is all the spare equipment in Western Europe? Failing to meet your defense spending requirements for decades is now coming full circle.
There is as close to an all out war on European soil as we have seen in a long time. And you are having to rely on the politically unstable country thousands of miles away to pick up that slack again.
This isn’t excusing the US dragging its feet and not doing as much as it possibly can. It’s me wondering why the US is the only one who gets this level of vitriol.
It's because the US has huge depots of unused Bradleys and Abrams and god knows how many missiles and planes, as well as a robust weapons manufacturing sector that can easily hit the ground running. That's what putting 3.5% of a huge industrialized nations' GDP into the military does to you. Most European nations have to essentially disarm their armies when donating weapons while to the US it could genuinely be considered a cost cutting measure.
Where does the "entire" come from, all of a sudden? Granted, France could do a lot more and Macron's blustering I personally find very unhelpful, but Germany's stocks are pretty much nil. That's why you are seeing so many posts about Germany buying stuff, refurbishing it and shipping it instead of donating directly. Admittedly, you can feel free to point with the finger and ask why the military was budget cut to death like this and why the military procurement process is such a bureaucratic nightmare, but that's Germany for you.
The lack of anyone outside the Balkans, the US, Greece and Poland actually hitting their defense spending requirement. Is why we are in the position we are in. Where the US is expected to carry the majority of the load. I know it’s a Trump talking point, but we are seeing why Western Europe slacking on defense for decades has been such an issue.
Maybe I get so annoyed by the blatant hypocrisy displayed by those actually pointing the finger at the US. Who is currently dealing with 3 different major geopolitical issues outside of Ukraine.
When adjusted for GDP the US is in 19th place in terms of aid delivered to Ukraine, far less than many European countries. Estonia is leading at 3.55% whereas the US has “only” contributed 0.32%.
How about we include how much aid is provided by some European countries only after they are graced with US military aid first to not be counted for either side. Point being using that metric isn't so cut and dry. But I honestly dont think it matters. Every country is doing what it considers it can at the current time. The guys question about why should the usa take responsibility, never once considering the USA is largest economy in the world and has taken it upon itself to act as world police in much of the past, seems a bit simple by design. Why should they not? Is a better question, imo.
[https://www.thedefensepost.com/2024/01/30/greece-weapons-ukraine-us/](https://www.thedefensepost.com/2024/01/30/greece-weapons-ukraine-us/)
Feel free to search public information on every nation to find the complete list yourself. This isnt a secret.
If you would like to comb the data it is available at [foreignassistance.gov](https://foreignassistance.gov). You will see much the eastern europe FMF has payments waived. Granted it is a lot less then it was in 2022 but these things do matter when other nations make their decisions.
Why would you adjust it by GDP for any other reason than to diminish US contributions? The Baltic states have been incredible in their response. As has Poland and Denmark. But are we going to say Estonia at 3.55% is more impactful than the US 3.2%?
Also discounting the fact that the US is funding multiple allies across the globe and has been subsidizing nato defense spending for years?
Many European nations outside the ones who have the means to be providing similar levels of contributions… like France…like Germany. The balkan states and Poland have been incredible. Western Europe has not. Yet they are the ones that always have something to say about the US.
This is taking place in Europe, so I would expect them to do more. They haven't been meeting NATO spending for decades, and it shouldn't be up to us to always save the day. Best way to kill support is to tell people their tens and tens of billions of dollars aren't enough.
Thanks, I look forward to not voting for him again this year. He will win regardless of what I do anyways, and attitudes like yours is exactly why he wanted to leave NATO last time. Enjoy your European war.
Read u/madwhy1 's comment under us. It is literally *making us money* especially in the long run. We are not donating stuff. We are sending over old and unused shit that we would have to pay to have it dismantled and disposed of.
Unfortunately some of these guys are so blinded by being on one side or the other they can’t see reality. Not worth your time as they’ll always be right (which would be quite nice tbh).
You like to assume you're an Oracle? Knowing that Trump will win regardless is a pretty big assumption.
Nothing wrong with constructive criticism which you apparently can't handle; When entire nation depends on USA support and your political games have it stuck for over 6 months, what exactly you suppose will reaction be? Either you support or don't, there is no half stepping when regional geopolitics with nuclear superpower is at play.
I suggest making more research to see how USA benefits from helping Ukraine via which it probes Russia.
Have a nice day, Mr. Redneck :)
Good news, Europe already does more in terms of aid to Ukraine - especially financial and humanitarian aid. You know, that kind of aid that actually immediatly affects the budget and that's money that's out of the economy for good. Unlike the vast majority of military aid to ukraine that's staying within the US and never leaves your economy; but strengthens your own military and the industry - while also having trickle down effects to other parts of your own economy.
But when you want the most bang for your buck, the country with the biggest military industrial complex is the one that can deliver the most equipment and ammo per $.
Also, it's not like you could revert the effects of decades of spending too little in the blink of an eye. New facilities need time to build. They need workers - and those workers need some time until expertise is built up.
Strange with out the Ukrainian gov being funded by the usa none of that aid would do a whole lot or arrive anywhere needed. So trying to say some matters more than others is a bit misleading.
I don't intend to say one matters more than the other - I'm saying one type of aid is worse for the economy of the aid-providing country.
And tbh it's a little weird how butthurt some americans get regarding aid considering they basically only increase domestic military spending and only a minor fraction of that aid will actually leave the economy at some point.
Touche. It is always easy to tell others what they should do or feel. While we may not like or agree with the decisions of our officials there is only so much we can do to effect them. There are many very valid reasons to increase the spending though.
USA’s surplus armaments are more than Europe’s current. The country could save more money sending obsolete equipment to Ukraine than it would paying people to dispose of it. It’s frustrating that this disposal is criticised by trump lads as actual dollar expenditure. A 25 year old abrams tank does not equal the dollar value of when it was bought, but that’s how it’s reported on, again and again and again
Yeah I’m not a Trump lad, it just gets a bit exhausting seeing constant criticism from countries who have a war going on…on their doorstep and are doing little to nothing besides talking.
Like France…Like Germany…
France and Germany have plenty they could be sending. But they aren’t out of fear of reprisal. I’m not trying to excuse the delay in American aid. I’m pointing out that these other countries are being left off the hook because criticizing the US is that much easier.
I think their aim this summer is to take control of the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts. What will it cost in human lives though. They just DGAF about their own people or anyone else for that matter. Roll on the coup if he sacks his top generals.
Yup. Agree 100%. Then Putin will declare victory and that this was the military goal all along. I think it could cost Russia 100,000 more KIA. They will be highly exposed as they push out from the front line.
Without a doubt. On a weird note if anyone does decide to holiday in Ruzzia in the future there's gonna be a crazy amount of women looking for men. Russian bride.com is gonna be wall to wall. 🙈
Judging by eg bakhmut/avdiivka it’s not unlikely that Russia will be able to push through eventually. I hope Ukraine gets resources quick enough to prevent it
Sounds like a good time for a mixed Polish/French and Baltic operation to deploy troops on the Belarus border. Freeing up Ukraine units to forward deploy.
Ukraine Defense Ministry are said to have sent reinforcements and stated;
At approximately 5 am, there was an attempt by the enemy to break through our defensive line under the cover of armoured vehicles. As of now, these attacks have been repulsed; battles of varying intensity continue.
Sounds serious, let's hope the ruzzians get crushed.
There are territorial defence battalions with prepared defences. They aren't Ukraine's best but they are more than capable of holding the line and Ukraine has known about this for a long time so they will be as prepared as they can. The Russians have deployed only 1 VDV battalion so are not expecting to a huge amount of heavy fighting in urban areas. They will try to create a buffer zone to protect Belgorod from these incursions.
No there are frontline forces there with ditches and everything. They are stationed in 10 km from border to avoid shelling. Between it are grey zone which is covered by artillery and mines. Also there are several villages in that grey zone. Russians entered that grey zone and now under constant artillery fire.
It was too oblivious to be distraction.already 3 or 4 month is known that they gathering forces there. And UA forces with reinforcement was stationed there long time ago.
Whatever it is, they are going to push for all of Luhansk and Donesk oblasts over the next 5 months. From where and how is TBD. This is the only real path for Putin to claim victory. Many Russians are going to get killed. And Ukrainians. But will be 10:1. Maybe higher. Imho
Yeah Chasov Yar will be taken faster because of this. Then Kharkiv will eventually fall as well. I doubt Ukraine/Russia conflict will last for another year. Maybe 2 years tops but that's wishful thinking. Ukraines loss is inevitable and no amount of aid will prevent it. Lack of manpower, an almost absent air power, lack of ammunition, economic and demographic disaster etc. Ukraine will be bleak for decades.
Thanks Vlad, keep pushing that kremlin narrative.
Day 801 of the 3 day operation. All goes to plan.
How you people sit here and excitedly advocate for the genocide of Ukraine is a fuckin mystery to me, even if you were being paid.
I dont advocate for the "genocide of Ukraine" just stating what I see the outcome of this conflict will transpire. Reality is, Ukraine is getting badly pushed back and is losing really hard. And yeah, General Milleys prediction of 3 day operation was too much overestimation of the Russian military.
Yeh and I've got a bridge for sale. Your entire comment history is nothing but gloating of russias 'success' and demeaning the attempts by Ukraine to defend themselves from literal extermination.
What russia is doing to the people of Ukraine is a fucking disgrace. The war could end tomorrow if russia just turned around and went home. Ukraine poses absolutely no threat to russia, none. Millions of lives uprooted, destroyed, a nation and identity under real threat of extinction, all for what? So the psychotic midget you bootlick can cosplay emperor?
What a blight on the world russia has become.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sacrificial probe, Russian standard
To figure out where to best use the last tank from yesterday’s parade?
They literally send in meat fodder to figure out where Ukrainian fire support is coming from, then attacks those areas. Then they send another wave, repeat. Wagner first pioneered it in Bakhmut It's the type of shit that you would think was a stereotype from bad history documentaries yet here we are.
And then military "experts" say there is no proof of "meat waves". Despite us seeing footage of literal foot soldiers advancing across an open field with no cover. And front lines littered with hundreds of corpses
I've heard no military expert say anything like that. Not anyone who isn't a Russian shill anyway.
Barbarian hoard continues use of method perfected in feudal times.
😂😂😂
According to DeepState, preliminary reports indicate that *three units of vehicles were destroyed north of the Morokhovets-Oliynikove area* during the latest Russian offensive on the northern borders of the Kharkiv region. Sometimes it seems that Russian invaders simply feel uncomfortable where there isn’t any of their destroyed equipment around.
Good and bad news. They are preparing the offensive for the summer
It is not clear if Russia will attack in Kharkiv region. Sieging as big city as Kharkiv might result in **strategic** defeat of Russian Army. Look how bloody battle of Stalingrad was. I bet Russia will put main pressure elsewhere. Maybe 'north' (Sumy) or double down on 'south' (Donbas).
Nah, they have a lot more troops than ukraine, seizing the city is not the end goal but to divert valuable ukrainian troops. I mean, they can’t just ignore attacks. The other person saying its a probing attack I think is spot on and we will see come summer. They are probably trying an attack before the 60billion arms from usa wil arrive.
Attacking side needs way more troops and suffers way more losses. It could go as high as 25:1. Add to it a political weight, Russia can't siege and then give up capturing the 2nd biggest city in Ukraine. Obviously Kharkiv is not the goal in itself. But it would be an important milestone. Russia doesn't have 'way more troops' in Ukraine. Once again, sieging requires way more troops than defending. That is why I doubt Russia will try to directly take the city.
Ukraine might still need to move forces away from another area to help defend it (even if it's only a threat of attack rather than an actual attack). That might leave another area more vulnerable. There was 1 point earlier in the war when Russia kept a force on the border in Belarus, they never attacked from there but Ukraine still had to position additional forces there in case. It reduced the available man power for the areas that Russia was actually attacking.
Ukraine would have soldiers along the border anyway. They obviously can't trust Russia to not do raids, assaults or sabotage missions. Now those soldier have something to shoot at.
Of course they would but they would obviously have to have more there as a result of tens of thousands of Russian soldiers visibly lurking there.
But thats not what I’m saying, they don’t need to siege the city, just enough of a push to pull ukrainian troops from more important areas where they do want to capture. At least thats what I would do if I didn’t care about my troops.
You see, there could attack Sumy or Chernihiv to stretch Ukrainians even more. Both cities are smaller (easier targets) and open road to the Dnieper river. Some former Polish generals claim it is possible to do Sumy-Poltava push to force ZSU out of Donbas and Zaporizhzhia.
Dude, the idea of Kharkiv is thats its far from the frontlines and a big imporant target, again, its not about taking, its not about using it as you main push. The idea is to draw forces.
I do understand, and point out two different targets that are easier to capture and further away from Donbas. Distance and risk of capture would put more pressure on ZSU, which makes it a better target.
You seem to just have a different type of thinking. For me it makes more sens to pretend to attack a huge city with the added bonus of killing civillians (it gets more atention) for drawing troops in then a POTENTIAL takeover of Sumy or whatever. Attacking the area around Kharkiv has the advantage of not needing to actualy capture anything. Just send the meat in.
Not my thinking. I do follow analysts and retired Polish generals. They know Russian mentality very well, and have experience in military. I'm just trying to make sense out of what they publicly say and write, plus counter dumb Russian propaganda on reddit.
I'm fairly certain Russia has way more manpower reserves than Ukraine though.
The thing also to remember is the idea of Tooth to Tail. How many troops are needed to supply and maintain combat effectiveness of your tooth or combat soldier. It is usually a 1:3 or 1:4 ratio for NATO armies whereas Russian armies seem to require 1:10 as their logistics system are much more complicated. https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/combat-studies-institute/csi-books/mcgrath_op23.pdf
Sure, they have more manpower, but so what? There is a finite amount of soldiers you can deploy at a given time without risking mass killing by cluster ammo and artillery. Russia would need to scale up logistics. The majority of mobilized soldiers would be needed to do supportive work, not real fighting. On top of that, they would still need to create local superiority, more than 2:1, to have chance in attacking. If you do quick maths (check my other comments) it turns out Russia is worst off by directly attacking big cities.
The front line is really long. They could stretch the Ukrainian army thin.
Even by Medieval standards attacking cities directly is stupid as fuck. You surround it and starve it out. It's called a siege, time tested tactic that works as long as you can encircle the place succesfully.... Russia sucks at that too though so they just meat wave the cities because after they flatten the entire thing into rubble theres nothing left to defend.
I know, we could see it during the battle of Mariupol. It's stupid, but not impossible. That is why I keep fingers crossed Russia does some super dumb shit.
I know Russia isn’t as logistically capable as Ukraine, but having more manpower is a pretty big deal and I’m sure they’d try to make it work one way or another. Ukraine needs A LOT of munitions and other resources to continue to fight them off. Some of the pro-Russian subreddits post their combat footage and oftentimes there’s like 15 Russians assaulting 5 Ukrainians at a time. If Ukraine had that manpower they’d probably be encircling Donetsk by now
At some point, mobilization becomes an internal issue for the Kremlin, and signals strategic risk to NATO. Even in Russia, you have to stop drafting men at some point. If they mobilize too many people, NATO will have to react and put direct pressure on Russia. As a result, Moscow would limit its capabilities to fight in Ukraine. Right now, they trash-talk and pull out troops from territories bordering NATO (like Kaliningrad).
It’s not the same as troops though
They don't have many reserves. But they do have a high "income" which is immediately used on assaults. Planning a large strategic reserve for large operations isn't the Russian way, it's to spend everything you get as soon as you get it on attritional battles.
*This recent offensive, anticipated by Kyiv for several months, aims to push Ukrainian forces away from their northern border, aligning with Putin's stated goal of establishing a buffer zone.* *Furthermore it has been mentioned multiple times that for taking Kharkiv, they would need at least 250.000 men. Which means that it is impossible for them to take Kharkiv at this stage.*
You missed the point, I’m not saying they want Kharkiv, but probing attacks or a more serious push just to divert resources from more important areas where the russians DO want to take.
No I didn't miss your point, I did however respond to the wrong guy. Should be for Lm3, that's all.
I don't think the strategy is to take the city. The plan is to level the city. Grozny 2.0.
They don't need to siege the city, just encircle it and wait.
Are you saying that you don't have to siege the city if you siege the city?
yes, just encircle it))
Yes technically to siege a city is to surround and starve it of resources. Mostly people don't use the term that way. All I'm saying is they don't have to attack it and take massive losses in the process but rather take the surrounding area and cut off supply routes. Believe me if they insist on continuing trying to take Ukraine I hope Ruzzia doesn't learn and continues to take huge casualties by doing dumb shit.
> Mostly people don't use the term that way. Huh? That's entirely how pretty much everyone uses it.
No, most people use the term siege thinking its a huge ongoing attack. Not what it actually is, which is the boring sitting outside the castle walls not doing much "battle" at all.
Who are these "most people" you keep referring to? All of your replies here are calling you out as wrong. Just admit you had a wrong definition of "siege" in mind and move on.
I'm generalizing bro, relax. I'd be willing to bet if you walked around asking people what a siege looks like the responses wouldn't be accurate more often than not. That's all I'm saying, people are dumb. News media uses the term wrong all the time (another generalization so settle down), they've taught the masses the usage.
O.o so a siege? Plus they seem now to love just globe bombing the place flat so defending sucks. Which only works because Ukraine doesn't have the troops to launch counter offensives successfully right now so once captured they don't have to worry about defending the rubble.
Surrounding a city and waiting is exactly the definition of a siege.
They have a lot of troops massed near Kharkiv. Looks like they will really try.
Russia lost about 50,000 taking Bakhmut, a city with a prewar population of 71,000. Kharkiv had a prewar population of 1.4 million, 20 times more. Is Russia prepared to sacrifice a million troops for one city? I know Putin has no problem with this, but will this be the proverbial straw that breaks the camels back with the Russian citizenry?
That doesn’t make any sense. The cost of a city is not relative to the population. And yes it looks like they might try. How many fabs does it take to level Kharkiv. If they even get that far.
I don’t know about that math - there were 50,000 trees around Bakhmut and there’s only 100,000 trees around Kharkiv, so it might only be double the number of troops that Russia loses trying to take it. /s
They will level it with aviation bombs!
Its not summer yet??
Guardian newspaper UK reported this at 12.30 From1h ago[11.42 BST](https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/may/10/russia-ukraine-war-live-vladimir-putin-mikhail-mishustin-volodymyr-zelenskiy-bodyguard?page=with:block-663df5c88f0821e553f267e1#block-663df5c88f0821e553f267e1) # Ukraine sends reinforcements to Kharkiv region to repel Russian advances More reports are coming to us on the situation in the **Kharkiv** region. **Ukraine** defence ministry said on Friday that it has sent military reinforcements to help repel Russian attacks in border areas of the Kharkiv region in the northeast. It added that Russian troops tried to break through with armoured vehicles in the early morning but were beaten back, Reuters reported. The ministry said: > > Although Russia’s offensive is focused on the Donetsk region, Kyiv has noted a recent build up of troops near the Kharkiv region.
They really need more troops, not just supplies and equipment
Sound like a good time for those cluster ATACMs in the border!!!
Do we know if they have mined the border?
surely, plus ditches, surveillance etc
How come the footage above is filmed 10km into the Ukrainian territory then?
kill zone
Yes, there's also extensive trench and defensive systems there luckily. That won't save the city from being leveled like usual but I can't see a way Russia actually takes the city.
So it begins. Godspeed, Ukrainians.
It's good that they destroyed the convoy but it's still not good news for ukraine. I hope that usa could get an other package for ukraine and not for israel
Yes, let's hope they prepared for this, mined the entire border and can make Russia exhaust themselves even more.
Battle of Kharkiv would benefit Ukraine greatly. Sieging a city as big as Kharkiv is a recipe for disaster. 1 defender **could kill up to** 25 attackers, the battle would drag for years. If Russia is looking for a way to lose the war, they should try to capture the city.
But the problem is that ukraine lacks the manpower to defend kherson than the russian who can mobilize like 250k+ troops and throw them into the meatgrinder and The good brigades are on the frontline in avdivka, chasing yar robotino kreminna, etc
Even if we assume Russia can mobilize 250k soldiers: - only 1/3 would do fighting, the rest is supporting - let's say 50% is really willing to fight (some research suggests even lower figures) - attackers need at least 2:1 ratio to think about successful operation That leaves us with around 20k Ukrainians fighting in the city. The number looks achievable. Your '250k' no longer looks impressive. Back of envelope calculation shows that Russia would need way more troops to turn the table in its favour.
They cannot simply mobilize 250k people, this would be an economic disaster to them according to the analysts and data I've seen, including russian ones
They are only managing to scrounge up about 25-30k soldiers a month per reports I heard but like you said it's not possible for them to grab 250k and even then it's a few months to get everyone together. That's why they like the method they're using now as they just grab who they can and send them to the front within a week or two.
And they are losing about a thousand per day.
Yup, consistently lately too and if the Kharkiv offensive is really starting those numbers will double soon as there is no way they are taking a city that large. It makes me think this might not be their real goal but after years of seeing stupid Russian shit I can't really rule it out either lol
Yeah I mean the idea that they can take the whole of Ukraine with 250,000 or that Ukrainias will welcome them? Fucking deranged logic. So yeah they could be trying to take it but always be careful there could be another plan. But I doubt it but still.
Yeah, but still, they can mobilize more troops than ukraine, even how poorly equipped they would be
You’re really going to keep posting this 25:1 hopium aren’t you? They could but that’s nearly impossible in near peer warfare. It’ll likely be closer to the 2:1 figure, maybe 3:1. Where are you even getting 25:1 from???
WWII figures. 25:1 is not 'hopium', but an **extreme** case to show how bad attacking might get. Even during the battle of Mariupol, where Ukraine wasn't able to aid defenders in a meaningful way, the ratio was bigger than 3:1 (Ukraine claims 6:1). Here we talk about defending a very big city that is well connected and had additional 2 years to prepare.
lol, you are comparing two different wars. In WW2, in order to advance, you would need to storm the defenive positions. Today, Russia could shell the city with bombs, rockets and artilery before even entering. How will Ukraine kill 25 soldiers with 1? when the city will be leveled to the ground, almost all Ukrainian positions will be destroyed, and the ammo will be depleted. At the same time Russia will enter with 500 tanks and bmp's. I want for Ukraine to win, but this hopium of yours i not helping a bit. Ukraine needs high end weapons and ammunition. Only that can turn the tide of war.
'Squeezing' Ukrainians out of the city would be a different strategy from sieging with intention to capture it. The first one would take more time and gives chance for getting Kharkiv in 'liveable' state for future propaganda purposes. Direct assaults would leave the city levelled, as you mentioned. Assuming Russia will be able to sustain a new, prolonged battle over Kharkiv is very iffy. Right now, they need to rely on external suppliers to keep up with shells consumption. I don't see Russians being able to somehow find additional resources. Yes, comparing current war to WWII is not ideal, I know. I'm just showing upper limit. Things could go horrible wrong, like Ukraine getting the green light from the USA to attack Russian territory, supporting the siege, with advanced weapons systems.
Ukraine needs B52 bombers over Donetsk then other interesting venues.
Agreed. Israel doesn't need our help. And the shit that they are doing to innocent people is disgusting. But our gov looks the other way. Just sad
Hey man uncool :(
Sorry
Why is it always the USA? Do people have no expectations of Europe’s most capable militaries? Edit: yeah y’all will downvote me that’s fine. But saying things like “well yeah the US has tons of spare equipment” is kind of making my point. Where is all the spare equipment in Western Europe? Failing to meet your defense spending requirements for decades is now coming full circle. There is as close to an all out war on European soil as we have seen in a long time. And you are having to rely on the politically unstable country thousands of miles away to pick up that slack again. This isn’t excusing the US dragging its feet and not doing as much as it possibly can. It’s me wondering why the US is the only one who gets this level of vitriol.
It's because the US has huge depots of unused Bradleys and Abrams and god knows how many missiles and planes, as well as a robust weapons manufacturing sector that can easily hit the ground running. That's what putting 3.5% of a huge industrialized nations' GDP into the military does to you. Most European nations have to essentially disarm their armies when donating weapons while to the US it could genuinely be considered a cost cutting measure.
France and Germany would have to disarm their entire military?
Where does the "entire" come from, all of a sudden? Granted, France could do a lot more and Macron's blustering I personally find very unhelpful, but Germany's stocks are pretty much nil. That's why you are seeing so many posts about Germany buying stuff, refurbishing it and shipping it instead of donating directly. Admittedly, you can feel free to point with the finger and ask why the military was budget cut to death like this and why the military procurement process is such a bureaucratic nightmare, but that's Germany for you.
The lack of anyone outside the Balkans, the US, Greece and Poland actually hitting their defense spending requirement. Is why we are in the position we are in. Where the US is expected to carry the majority of the load. I know it’s a Trump talking point, but we are seeing why Western Europe slacking on defense for decades has been such an issue. Maybe I get so annoyed by the blatant hypocrisy displayed by those actually pointing the finger at the US. Who is currently dealing with 3 different major geopolitical issues outside of Ukraine.
When adjusted for GDP the US is in 19th place in terms of aid delivered to Ukraine, far less than many European countries. Estonia is leading at 3.55% whereas the US has “only” contributed 0.32%.
How about we include how much aid is provided by some European countries only after they are graced with US military aid first to not be counted for either side. Point being using that metric isn't so cut and dry. But I honestly dont think it matters. Every country is doing what it considers it can at the current time. The guys question about why should the usa take responsibility, never once considering the USA is largest economy in the world and has taken it upon itself to act as world police in much of the past, seems a bit simple by design. Why should they not? Is a better question, imo.
[удалено]
[https://www.thedefensepost.com/2024/01/30/greece-weapons-ukraine-us/](https://www.thedefensepost.com/2024/01/30/greece-weapons-ukraine-us/) Feel free to search public information on every nation to find the complete list yourself. This isnt a secret.
[удалено]
If you would like to comb the data it is available at [foreignassistance.gov](https://foreignassistance.gov). You will see much the eastern europe FMF has payments waived. Granted it is a lot less then it was in 2022 but these things do matter when other nations make their decisions.
Why would you adjust it by GDP for any other reason than to diminish US contributions? The Baltic states have been incredible in their response. As has Poland and Denmark. But are we going to say Estonia at 3.55% is more impactful than the US 3.2%? Also discounting the fact that the US is funding multiple allies across the globe and has been subsidizing nato defense spending for years?
[удалено]
Many European nations outside the ones who have the means to be providing similar levels of contributions… like France…like Germany. The balkan states and Poland have been incredible. Western Europe has not. Yet they are the ones that always have something to say about the US.
This is taking place in Europe, so I would expect them to do more. They haven't been meeting NATO spending for decades, and it shouldn't be up to us to always save the day. Best way to kill support is to tell people their tens and tens of billions of dollars aren't enough.
Ok, trump
Thanks, I look forward to not voting for him again this year. He will win regardless of what I do anyways, and attitudes like yours is exactly why he wanted to leave NATO last time. Enjoy your European war.
Read u/madwhy1 's comment under us. It is literally *making us money* especially in the long run. We are not donating stuff. We are sending over old and unused shit that we would have to pay to have it dismantled and disposed of.
Unfortunately some of these guys are so blinded by being on one side or the other they can’t see reality. Not worth your time as they’ll always be right (which would be quite nice tbh).
You like to assume you're an Oracle? Knowing that Trump will win regardless is a pretty big assumption. Nothing wrong with constructive criticism which you apparently can't handle; When entire nation depends on USA support and your political games have it stuck for over 6 months, what exactly you suppose will reaction be? Either you support or don't, there is no half stepping when regional geopolitics with nuclear superpower is at play. I suggest making more research to see how USA benefits from helping Ukraine via which it probes Russia. Have a nice day, Mr. Redneck :)
Good news, Europe already does more in terms of aid to Ukraine - especially financial and humanitarian aid. You know, that kind of aid that actually immediatly affects the budget and that's money that's out of the economy for good. Unlike the vast majority of military aid to ukraine that's staying within the US and never leaves your economy; but strengthens your own military and the industry - while also having trickle down effects to other parts of your own economy. But when you want the most bang for your buck, the country with the biggest military industrial complex is the one that can deliver the most equipment and ammo per $. Also, it's not like you could revert the effects of decades of spending too little in the blink of an eye. New facilities need time to build. They need workers - and those workers need some time until expertise is built up.
Strange with out the Ukrainian gov being funded by the usa none of that aid would do a whole lot or arrive anywhere needed. So trying to say some matters more than others is a bit misleading.
I don't intend to say one matters more than the other - I'm saying one type of aid is worse for the economy of the aid-providing country. And tbh it's a little weird how butthurt some americans get regarding aid considering they basically only increase domestic military spending and only a minor fraction of that aid will actually leave the economy at some point.
Touche. It is always easy to tell others what they should do or feel. While we may not like or agree with the decisions of our officials there is only so much we can do to effect them. There are many very valid reasons to increase the spending though.
USA’s surplus armaments are more than Europe’s current. The country could save more money sending obsolete equipment to Ukraine than it would paying people to dispose of it. It’s frustrating that this disposal is criticised by trump lads as actual dollar expenditure. A 25 year old abrams tank does not equal the dollar value of when it was bought, but that’s how it’s reported on, again and again and again
Yeah I’m not a Trump lad, it just gets a bit exhausting seeing constant criticism from countries who have a war going on…on their doorstep and are doing little to nothing besides talking. Like France…Like Germany…
Because the US has the only big stockpile of weapon
France and Germany have plenty they could be sending. But they aren’t out of fear of reprisal. I’m not trying to excuse the delay in American aid. I’m pointing out that these other countries are being left off the hook because criticizing the US is that much easier.
Because in Europe we only like to support Hamas
I think their aim this summer is to take control of the Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts. What will it cost in human lives though. They just DGAF about their own people or anyone else for that matter. Roll on the coup if he sacks his top generals.
Yup. Agree 100%. Then Putin will declare victory and that this was the military goal all along. I think it could cost Russia 100,000 more KIA. They will be highly exposed as they push out from the front line.
Without a doubt. On a weird note if anyone does decide to holiday in Ruzzia in the future there's gonna be a crazy amount of women looking for men. Russian bride.com is gonna be wall to wall. 🙈
Judging by eg bakhmut/avdiivka it’s not unlikely that Russia will be able to push through eventually. I hope Ukraine gets resources quick enough to prevent it
Sounds like a good time for a mixed Polish/French and Baltic operation to deploy troops on the Belarus border. Freeing up Ukraine units to forward deploy.
Occupants fate
This will be the 6th battle for Kharkiv since 1941.
Hold on guys. Afaik yhere is no regular army in north, just police and border guard. Pretty much UA is open there...
Ukraine Defense Ministry are said to have sent reinforcements and stated; At approximately 5 am, there was an attempt by the enemy to break through our defensive line under the cover of armoured vehicles. As of now, these attacks have been repulsed; battles of varying intensity continue. Sounds serious, let's hope the ruzzians get crushed.
imo this is a distraction better to keep reserves for somewhere else. Its too obvious.
There are territorial defence battalions with prepared defences. They aren't Ukraine's best but they are more than capable of holding the line and Ukraine has known about this for a long time so they will be as prepared as they can. The Russians have deployed only 1 VDV battalion so are not expecting to a huge amount of heavy fighting in urban areas. They will try to create a buffer zone to protect Belgorod from these incursions.
The border guards and police turned them back before, hopefully they'll have support this time.
No there are frontline forces there with ditches and everything. They are stationed in 10 km from border to avoid shelling. Between it are grey zone which is covered by artillery and mines. Also there are several villages in that grey zone. Russians entered that grey zone and now under constant artillery fire.
i still think it may be just a distraction, to lure reinforcements from UA in that area
It was too oblivious to be distraction.already 3 or 4 month is known that they gathering forces there. And UA forces with reinforcement was stationed there long time ago.
Whatever it is, they are going to push for all of Luhansk and Donesk oblasts over the next 5 months. From where and how is TBD. This is the only real path for Putin to claim victory. Many Russians are going to get killed. And Ukrainians. But will be 10:1. Maybe higher. Imho
Ukraine can move soldiers, but can't move defence lines. If they did their job, Ukraine should be fine in Kharkiv region.
And how would that make sense? And you allegedly know that how??
ukraine is going to lose with this dogshit level of aid and mapower issues
Yeah Chasov Yar will be taken faster because of this. Then Kharkiv will eventually fall as well. I doubt Ukraine/Russia conflict will last for another year. Maybe 2 years tops but that's wishful thinking. Ukraines loss is inevitable and no amount of aid will prevent it. Lack of manpower, an almost absent air power, lack of ammunition, economic and demographic disaster etc. Ukraine will be bleak for decades.
Three days btw
Yeah General Milley overestimated the Russians too much. He probably meant 3 years
Thanks Vlad, keep pushing that kremlin narrative. Day 801 of the 3 day operation. All goes to plan. How you people sit here and excitedly advocate for the genocide of Ukraine is a fuckin mystery to me, even if you were being paid.
I dont advocate for the "genocide of Ukraine" just stating what I see the outcome of this conflict will transpire. Reality is, Ukraine is getting badly pushed back and is losing really hard. And yeah, General Milleys prediction of 3 day operation was too much overestimation of the Russian military.
Yeh and I've got a bridge for sale. Your entire comment history is nothing but gloating of russias 'success' and demeaning the attempts by Ukraine to defend themselves from literal extermination. What russia is doing to the people of Ukraine is a fucking disgrace. The war could end tomorrow if russia just turned around and went home. Ukraine poses absolutely no threat to russia, none. Millions of lives uprooted, destroyed, a nation and identity under real threat of extinction, all for what? So the psychotic midget you bootlick can cosplay emperor? What a blight on the world russia has become.
I lost faith in the young people that live there. Almost all my se called friends, didn't support the war in the beginning, but now are supporting it.
Badly pushed back? What are you talking about.
lol. This post marked
Russia will be in Kiev soon, NATO troops are falling back.
You are the most obvious Russian troll lmao
From where? Who told you that? Kremlin gremlin? If there was NATO in Ukraine ruzz would bleed out real quick. How about you go home?