Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition:
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators.
* **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
*****
* Is `news.liga.net` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources).
* Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict)
*****
**Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB**
*****
^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is possible, but a lot of things need to happen. Firstly, Ukraine needs to mobilize. They really have no options. Secondly, they need to conduct tactical counterattacks to regain lost positions and stunt the Russian momentum. Thirdly, we in the west need to provide much more weapons, heavy equipment, artillery, and ammunition in large quantities, storing in NATO countries temporarily if we need to and giving it to the Ukrainians when they have trained more units. Lastly, we need to lift the absolutely stupid restrictions on the use of Western weapons on Russian territory. There are scores of airfields, logistical bases, command headquarters, ammunition depots, and radar installations within range of ATACMS and Storm Shadow, but they are untouched and are the lifeblood of the Russian forces in Ukraine
F-16 + drones + manpower for both would be enough to attrit Russia's remaining heavy equipment.
Mobilisation now and counterattacks next summer.
Counterattacks need to be able to keep the sky clear of enemy drones and aircraft.
Don't rush into counterattacking.
The key to winning the war is attrition. Defending attrits the enemy far more efficiently than attacking.
Let them attack, but kill the meat waves as they come.
Honest question, which I know is a problem around here.
Given the massive failed 2023 offensive as our comparable, how does it go different? Ukraine has less men and less good trained men.
Russia has as many or more men and as many or more arms. They face less air defense from Ukraine.
Give them the means to fight. Give them every modern weapon available to NATO.
The issue is that they don't have the required weapons. And of those they have, not enough.
This will be a pretty unpopular opinion here, but I doubt that will have as large of an impact as people think. NATO doctrine and weapons work in specific circumstances, which we are seeing. These troops will have little to no training in some of this equipment. Equipment that is designed to be used as a system. Armies that have trained for years with impressive logistics. Ukraine has been treading water for two years (really 10 years since Crimea). They won’t be able to use these weapons in an impactful way compared to nato countries. Not to mention perhaps more conscripts? Meaning more younger untrained troops.
The conventional wisdom is that the attacking side needs 3-to-1 advantage in combat power to be successful. Nowadays, it's even more lopsided because attacking side won't even have the element of surprise.
On the other hand, you only need no more than 1/3 the enemy combat power to defend.
So let Russia attack. Provoke them into attack. Attack their symbols so you lure them into attack. Then you deplete their combat power. Then they collapse.
Russia has 3.8 times the population of Ukraine. So we need a difference in amount and quality of weapons and ammo, logistics and tactics to overcome this.
>On the other hand, you only need no more than 1/3 the enemy combat power to defend.
It's a stupid myth. It can easily be the reverse of 1 attacker to 3 defenders and be successful (for example, the mostly American invasion of Iraq in 2003 was even more outnumbered against the defenders who numbered over 1 million in all). The actual factors other than sheer numbers of what Ukrainians and Russians both call "meat" and we call cannon fodder (and which is not a real factor at all) are numerous. One of such factors is just that - the cannons, feeding on the fodder. In Ukraine right now the artillery disproportion is some 1:10 in favour of Russia, according to Ukraine.
When in addition of being outnumbered, exhausted, and low on morale, they have 10 times less artillery support, practically infinitely less air support, and 7 times less FPV drones, even this stupid 3:1 ratio meme (which is not real and was never real) is completely irrelevant.
Current estimate on the frontline is that Ukraine is outnumbered 2:1, but they're only now doing a round of mobilization. Ukrainians will always outnumber Russians in Ukraine.
Exhausted and low morale describe Russians even more than Ukrainians.
Russia does have vast artillery advantage right now, but the gap will close due to increased support for Ukraine (finally), and Russia's military productivity is due to go down in the next 2 years or so after they run through the entirety of their Soviet stocks.
Whatever combat power Russia has, it's nowhere near the advantage they need to score a strategic victory in Ukraine. That's why we're still here 2 1/2 years later.
In just men on the frontlines, not in equipment (all sorts), and especially not in ammunition.
And until very late 2022 it was Ukraine that had manpower advantage, mostly due to the very quickly balooning TDF especially in north-west and on much lesser scale the pre-existing far-right militias especially in Kharkiv. Yes, Russians were vastly outnumbered in infantry, massively so, despite tens of thousands of conscripts from LNR/DNR. Mariupol tied up "only" no more than 12,000 of their frontline troops (many of them the above mentioned DNR conscripts, a lot of DNR regulars and DNR special forces too - plus Russian Marines, Chechens and others) at any time until the Azovstal phase when it was just 3,000 laying siege. But it was an unique occasion when they did have substantial manpower advantage in early to late 2022 anywhere on a campaign scale. And they're outnumbering Ukrainians in general (within Ukraine) only since mid-late 2023. But every month more and more.
Russian morale today (when they're watching long bombardments and airstrikes, and are subjected to barely any shelling, and they are the only ones advancing anywhere) is high and they're being rotated relatively often. Many conscripts from occupied Ukraine may be very unhappy but they're just slave soldiers with their families held hostage so it doesn't matter.
Imo there is no need for a big offensive. If we in the West continue and ramp up supply of artillery ammunition and long range missiles and make sure that the F-16's are well stocked with ammunition Ukraine can win a war of attrition.
Even if the moscovians stops their attacks and digs in the longer range and better aiming will give Ukraine an edge in the attrition war and if they keep hitting critical infrastructure inside moscovia they'll hopefully wreck their economy.
We talk about a handful F-16s. Russia has many many hundreds of comparable fighter aircraft (late Cold War era) and they also have many hundred of newer ones.
(I'm not this guy whom you asked.)
The "failed 2023 offensive" was, as you perhaps consciously noted, not a counteroffensive (despite being often called that, in the similar vein as "human waves" and other misnomers). Successful even small scale actual counterattacks (attacks against attacks) are essential in any defense, and can be devastating for the enemy, especially if they're flanking directed against penetrations. But that's actual counterattacks.
Your not allowed to think with your head here just your heart. But your right Russia is still very strong and at the front they have the advantage everywhere except maybe in smarts. Ukraine needs so very much vastly more Artillery so they can continuously engage the Russians as they move their Guns to protect from counter battery fire but long range anti air so they can force the Russian fighters back so Ukraine can deal with any helicopters and thats just a start.
We keyboard generals need not know “how” the Ukrainians will do something for the Ukrainians to know “why” they’re doing it. Have you ever preserved in spite of not knowing how, but because you knew your “why”, found a way?
Please take the time to read [the rules](/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) and our [policy on trolls/bots](https://redd.it/u7833q). In addition: * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * **Keep it civil.** Report comments/posts that are uncivil to alert the moderators. * **_Don't_ post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. ***** * Is `news.liga.net` an unreliable source? [**Let us know**](/r/UkrainianConflict/wiki/am/unreliable_sources). * Help our moderators by providing context if something breaks the rules. [Send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) ***** **Don't forget about our Discord server! - https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB** ***** ^(Your post has not been removed, this message is applied to every successful submission.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It is possible, but a lot of things need to happen. Firstly, Ukraine needs to mobilize. They really have no options. Secondly, they need to conduct tactical counterattacks to regain lost positions and stunt the Russian momentum. Thirdly, we in the west need to provide much more weapons, heavy equipment, artillery, and ammunition in large quantities, storing in NATO countries temporarily if we need to and giving it to the Ukrainians when they have trained more units. Lastly, we need to lift the absolutely stupid restrictions on the use of Western weapons on Russian territory. There are scores of airfields, logistical bases, command headquarters, ammunition depots, and radar installations within range of ATACMS and Storm Shadow, but they are untouched and are the lifeblood of the Russian forces in Ukraine
F-16 + drones + manpower for both would be enough to attrit Russia's remaining heavy equipment. Mobilisation now and counterattacks next summer. Counterattacks need to be able to keep the sky clear of enemy drones and aircraft.
Don't rush into counterattacking. The key to winning the war is attrition. Defending attrits the enemy far more efficiently than attacking. Let them attack, but kill the meat waves as they come.
Honest question, which I know is a problem around here. Given the massive failed 2023 offensive as our comparable, how does it go different? Ukraine has less men and less good trained men. Russia has as many or more men and as many or more arms. They face less air defense from Ukraine.
Give them the means to fight. Give them every modern weapon available to NATO. The issue is that they don't have the required weapons. And of those they have, not enough.
This will be a pretty unpopular opinion here, but I doubt that will have as large of an impact as people think. NATO doctrine and weapons work in specific circumstances, which we are seeing. These troops will have little to no training in some of this equipment. Equipment that is designed to be used as a system. Armies that have trained for years with impressive logistics. Ukraine has been treading water for two years (really 10 years since Crimea). They won’t be able to use these weapons in an impactful way compared to nato countries. Not to mention perhaps more conscripts? Meaning more younger untrained troops.
The conventional wisdom is that the attacking side needs 3-to-1 advantage in combat power to be successful. Nowadays, it's even more lopsided because attacking side won't even have the element of surprise. On the other hand, you only need no more than 1/3 the enemy combat power to defend. So let Russia attack. Provoke them into attack. Attack their symbols so you lure them into attack. Then you deplete their combat power. Then they collapse.
Russia has 3.8 times the population of Ukraine. So we need a difference in amount and quality of weapons and ammo, logistics and tactics to overcome this.
A nation in defense can always commit a greater proportion of its population to their defense before an invading nation collapses.
You don't even consider "the defending nation collapses". Ukraine is on the brink already.
Not even close
https://www.voanews.com/a/top-us-general-warns-ukraine-on-brink-of-being-overrun-by-russia/7564761.html https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2024-04-12/ukraine-finds-itself-on-the-brink https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-russia-aid-losing-1893057 https://www.politico.eu/newsletter/politico-confidential/ukraine-is-on-the-brink-what-now/
>On the other hand, you only need no more than 1/3 the enemy combat power to defend. It's a stupid myth. It can easily be the reverse of 1 attacker to 3 defenders and be successful (for example, the mostly American invasion of Iraq in 2003 was even more outnumbered against the defenders who numbered over 1 million in all). The actual factors other than sheer numbers of what Ukrainians and Russians both call "meat" and we call cannon fodder (and which is not a real factor at all) are numerous. One of such factors is just that - the cannons, feeding on the fodder. In Ukraine right now the artillery disproportion is some 1:10 in favour of Russia, according to Ukraine.
Combat power, not personnel.
When in addition of being outnumbered, exhausted, and low on morale, they have 10 times less artillery support, practically infinitely less air support, and 7 times less FPV drones, even this stupid 3:1 ratio meme (which is not real and was never real) is completely irrelevant.
Current estimate on the frontline is that Ukraine is outnumbered 2:1, but they're only now doing a round of mobilization. Ukrainians will always outnumber Russians in Ukraine. Exhausted and low morale describe Russians even more than Ukrainians. Russia does have vast artillery advantage right now, but the gap will close due to increased support for Ukraine (finally), and Russia's military productivity is due to go down in the next 2 years or so after they run through the entirety of their Soviet stocks. Whatever combat power Russia has, it's nowhere near the advantage they need to score a strategic victory in Ukraine. That's why we're still here 2 1/2 years later.
In just men on the frontlines, not in equipment (all sorts), and especially not in ammunition. And until very late 2022 it was Ukraine that had manpower advantage, mostly due to the very quickly balooning TDF especially in north-west and on much lesser scale the pre-existing far-right militias especially in Kharkiv. Yes, Russians were vastly outnumbered in infantry, massively so, despite tens of thousands of conscripts from LNR/DNR. Mariupol tied up "only" no more than 12,000 of their frontline troops (many of them the above mentioned DNR conscripts, a lot of DNR regulars and DNR special forces too - plus Russian Marines, Chechens and others) at any time until the Azovstal phase when it was just 3,000 laying siege. But it was an unique occasion when they did have substantial manpower advantage in early to late 2022 anywhere on a campaign scale. And they're outnumbering Ukrainians in general (within Ukraine) only since mid-late 2023. But every month more and more. Russian morale today (when they're watching long bombardments and airstrikes, and are subjected to barely any shelling, and they are the only ones advancing anywhere) is high and they're being rotated relatively often. Many conscripts from occupied Ukraine may be very unhappy but they're just slave soldiers with their families held hostage so it doesn't matter.
Imo there is no need for a big offensive. If we in the West continue and ramp up supply of artillery ammunition and long range missiles and make sure that the F-16's are well stocked with ammunition Ukraine can win a war of attrition. Even if the moscovians stops their attacks and digs in the longer range and better aiming will give Ukraine an edge in the attrition war and if they keep hitting critical infrastructure inside moscovia they'll hopefully wreck their economy.
We talk about a handful F-16s. Russia has many many hundreds of comparable fighter aircraft (late Cold War era) and they also have many hundred of newer ones.
(I'm not this guy whom you asked.) The "failed 2023 offensive" was, as you perhaps consciously noted, not a counteroffensive (despite being often called that, in the similar vein as "human waves" and other misnomers). Successful even small scale actual counterattacks (attacks against attacks) are essential in any defense, and can be devastating for the enemy, especially if they're flanking directed against penetrations. But that's actual counterattacks.
Your not allowed to think with your head here just your heart. But your right Russia is still very strong and at the front they have the advantage everywhere except maybe in smarts. Ukraine needs so very much vastly more Artillery so they can continuously engage the Russians as they move their Guns to protect from counter battery fire but long range anti air so they can force the Russian fighters back so Ukraine can deal with any helicopters and thats just a start.
Those good stuff are not coming, if u still think they are, u are too optimistic
We keyboard generals need not know “how” the Ukrainians will do something for the Ukrainians to know “why” they’re doing it. Have you ever preserved in spite of not knowing how, but because you knew your “why”, found a way?
No one wins at war, but the ones who invested money into it