Ukraine’s counter-offensive has been ongoing for over three months now as it seeks the elusive breakthrough of the Russian defence lines.
Many observers now consider that the attacks have stalled, despite some small gains here and there, and that there is little chance of any dramatic moves before next year.
One US intelligence chief, however, has predicted that there will be positive developments in the counter-offensive that would drive a wedge between Russia’s occupying forces. According to US intelligence analyst Trent Maul, Ukrainian forces could break through the rest of Russia’s defensive lines by the end of the year.
This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.
He opines that the Ukraine counter-offensive is going well and that Zelensky’s military has a “realistic possibility” of breaking through the second and third – and final – trench systems. According to his comments given to the Economist, this could drive a wedge between Russia’s occupying forces.
The UkrAF hope to break through the Russian defensive lines in the south before pushing on to the important communications hub of Melitopol closer to the Azov coast, thereby splitting Russian forces in the south and severing the land route to Crimea. He reckoned that there was a “realistic possibility” of breaching the rest of the lines, a turn of phrase that suggests a 40-50 per cent likelihood in the intelligence world.
This I fear may be a tad optimistic. Ukraine may have only 30 days or so left for fighting before the weather hinders its counter-offensive, a top-ranking US military officer has said. Speaking to the BBC, General Mark Milley, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff and the US Army’s most senior soldier, said prevailing conditions would make it much harder for Ukraine to manoeuvre. He also admitted the offensive had gone more slowly than expected.
General Milley also said it was too early to say whether the Ukrainian counter-offensive had failed, but said Ukraine was “progressing at a very steady pace “. Kyiv’s counter-offensive was launched in the summer and aims to liberate Russian-occupied territory in Ukraine, has so far seen only small gains.
So, given that the counter-offensive has now been underway since June this year, there’s no guarantee that another month’s effort will lead to a breach of the Russian lines. And then the autumn rains will severely restrict off road movement until the ground freezes over in winter.
On the positive side of things, it now appears that the US, at long last, is preparing to supply its ATACMS ground-to-ground missile for use in Ukraine. According to ABC News, the Biden administration is “likely” to send its long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems to help in its fight to repel the Russian invasion of its territory, quoting U.S. officials.
“They are coming,” said one official who had access to security assistance plans.
Whilst ATACMS is unlikely to be the gamechanger that alters the course of the war, it will be a welcome addition to Ukraine’s arsenal. It is a short-range ballistic missile that can be fired from both M142 HIMARS and M270 MLRS launchers, systems which Ukraine has already. It boasts a 230 kg high explosive warhead which produces blast, heat, and fragmentation effects capable of destroying heavy concrete structures, vehicles and personnel within a lethal blast radius of over 600 metres.
Crucially, ATACMS has a range of 300 km versus the normal GMLRS rockets which reach out to 70 km, enabling Russian logistic hubs and supply lines to be targeted effectively. Essentially it will bring the whole of Crimea within its range, including the Kerch bridge and numerous Russian military bases, and could help to make the Russian occupation there untenable. With luck and in the right circumstances, these missiles could facilitate a Russian collapse.
All of which is good news for Ukraine, but, like the long-promised F-16 fighter jets, ATACMS is not going to get to Ukraine overnight once the US decision is confirmed. It will take several months to get into theatre and for the requisite training and logistics to be in place.
And so the slog will continue in the meantime. Ukraine takes small bites out of the Russian defence lines; the Russians build new defence lines in depth behind those taken by the UkrAF. It has become a battle of stamina and who can sustain the struggle the longest, and not just between the main protagonists. Will the west grow weary of supporting a seemingly never-ending conflict?
Time will tell, but there is a real danger we’ll still be here this time next year.
Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a defence analyst and former army officer. Sign up for his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk
I have never subscribed to the mindset that the Ukraine can physically defeat Russia inside the Ukraine. Yes they have defied all the odds, and pulled off the impossible against a vastly superior military, first around Kyiv, then in Kharkiv, then in Kherson, and whilst Moscow suffered reversals in those 3 areas, it has resulted in it, been able to concentrate its vastly much more numerous forces in a much reduced battle front which as we are seeing it has dug into and all it has to do is sit tight and wait for general winter to come along, which will afford it the breathing space it needs to allow its back up plans (Ammo from abroad, train soldiers , build drone factories , allow its propaganda in the west to do its stuff etc) to come to fruition.
Nope, the way I see things, is that Kyiv looks at Vietnam, Lebanon, Afghanistan (both Russian and US) where the aggressor has been defeated by a death of a thousand cuts, than by an outright military victory. I believe that the strikes we have seen across Russia, is more aimed at the Russian audience than anything else, in which to turn the Russians against the dictator for life, who for pure vanity reasons will continue to fight the bad fight.
Meanwhilst in the west the media (with an aim to generate that next headline), those with a political axe to grind and of course the pro-Russian crowd keep on trying to tell me that the Ukraine has failed in its
spring, , summer offensive , with a load of so called experts, now proclaiming that we should give peace a chance and sell out the Ukraine to Moscow in which to appease Moscow, not noticing that others would see that, as a green light for them to go forth and multiply resulting in many more bush fires, which no doubt the ethical latte drinkers out there will state “Not our problem” until they wake up one morning and find that actually it is their problem.Indeed Farouk, appeasement guaranties war, destroying peace & security for millions.
Personally I don’t think it would lead to more bushfires…I think it would lead to an all consuming conflagration…if the West gives up on supporting Ukraine as it did the Afghan government then it’s highly likely china will think it can pull of an invasion of Taiwan. Once Taiwan kicks of neither the US or china will be able to back away, no mater how the war goes..they will fight to strategic exhaustion and drag all their allies or clients into something that would likely become a true world war.
Concur w/ your assessment. Uncertain which side will resort to nukes first. Really won’t matter, history will probably not be able to record the event.
I would suggest that neither side would resort to nukes so long as their central mainlands are not directly threatened. Even in the current Ukraine war, Russia itself is not overly threatened. The worst case for Russia is going back to the pre 2014 borders. So long as any war in the North West Pacific stays a Taiwan focused war, there is no reason to go nuclear. Trying to invade North America with boots on the ground, or Eastern China mainland in the reverse would be a different matter. That doesn’t mean it won’t be a bloody affair. It’s likely to end up exactly where it started (somewhat like Korea), in the end.
Hi DJ the Problem with any Taiwan conflict is it will not stay in Taiwan. Effectively once it starts neither the US or China will be able to back away. China will not be able to back away as it’s a totemic issues within China and to loss would effectively see the end of the present government, the US cannot loss as a Chinese victory would see the end of U.S. hegemony, this would make the conflict existential to what both nations see as their right and destiny to be the hegemonic power of the 21centery…
So both sides will not stop fighting until they suffer complete strategic exhaustion. As we have seen in the Ukraine Russian war and earlier in the Iran Iraq conflict as soon as a nation decided it’s in an existential fight it takes a lot to exhaust an nation and in this case we are talking the two largest economies on the planet with massive levels of industrial capacity, populations and fincial reserves…they are also an occean apart so neither can can undertake a beheading action.
so they will not stay in Taiwan they will both begin operations to affect the other strategically by attacking trade and sea lanes ( why do you think it has 8 13,000 ton cruisers and 40 7000 ton destroyers, all modern). At the same time each side will drag its allies and friends into the conflict….you will likely see china push norther Korea, Iran, Russia and a number of African and South American nations to undertake actions that support it as will as the US doing its utmost to bring its allies in as well…you could effectively see pretty much unrestricted navel warfare across the globe as well as lots of local US allies vs Chinese allies conflicts occurring..effectively it would very likely cascade quickly into a world war…with the ever present risk of someone going nuclear ( especially since you will have North Korea et al all on the field).
I agree that such a conflict would escalate, but even if it didn’t, just look at the harm the Russian invasion of Ukraine has already done in other countries. People starving in Africa and economies impacted worldwide. So far this is a relatively small, contained war. China-Taiwan, even before it escalates will create harmful effects that exceed those of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. If we can do more in Ukraine to discourage China’s expansionist tendencies, we must.
Obviously the chance of another global war should worry all of us, but politicians are all too willing to throw the dice if they think it will help them remain in power.
People arent starving in Africa because of the Ukraine conflict . Thats just agit-prop. Ukraine is 2% of the worlds wheat production, hardly noticeable [France produces more wheat] and even now Poland wont allow them export through their territory.
Sure speculators have made a killing but thats capitalism.
Its as silly as saying people are freezing because of bans on Russian oil or gas.
There are global commodities and supply just shifts all the time. I notice our kitchen salt comes from China and i thought shipping costs were through the roof , but there it goes
Agree there no way for the US to defend Taiwan without hitting facilities in China, on the coast at least. That opens up the US a target for China.
I can’t see a Taiwan conflict not involving attacks against Japanese territory, Guam or Hawaii, possibly even the US mainland.
Meanwhile the US and allies would have to go after shipyards, port facilities, civilian shipping, air strips, C3 sites and ballistic missile silos on the Chinese mainland. In short the mainland territory of US and China would be threatened and attacked.
The only way a conflict defending Taiwan wouldn’t become a massive world war is if it was nipped in the bud. Eg invasion fleet sunk, naval blockade sunk and air bases trying to prosecute an invasion were destroyed.
The USN submarine force could do that but at very high cost.
I don’t think the US will lift a finger for Taiwan. They are already extremely limited on what US firms can sell to them, actually fighting for them would be clown shoes.
Hi Chris I honestly think it depends on how much the west is still dependent on Taiwan semi conductors..if china invades when the west is still 70-80% dependent on Taiwan’s semi conductor industry it will defend it. It essentially has to or china will hold every card in regards to modern industry ( china would essentially become the hegemonic power in one step).
luckly the west has begun to wake up to that and is starting to develop wider semiconductor manufacturing, but it’s going to take years…and at present china has not competed its build up of navel assets ( its going to want to have a couple of effective carrier battle groups)….so in reality we have two sets of conditions..the first being the west’s dependence on Tiawan semi conductors and the second chinas view on its ability to prevent the U.S. and allies from forcing the strait if it invades and then potentially winning a wider war or preventing the U.S. from widening the war.
As a final point you have to remember that Taiwan created this dependency purposefully ( their silicon shield), knowing that the only rout to safety was to both not trigger mainland China and also make the U.S. dependent or need to intervene.
Its China who is dependent on semi conductors mostly from Taiwan. They spend as much on importing these things as they do on oil- remembering too they are used in almost all of their exports- to western countries and rest of the world
Sea borne imports and exports to and from China would cease overnight if they laid a finger on Taiwan due to similar blockade as Germany had in WW1 and WW2.
Their geographic situation is untenable for any sort of major conflict- for goodness sake they are dependent on imported food, minerals, coal, iron ore and as shown IC as well.
Yes but they also have a land boarder with Russia, that has all the food producing land china needs as well as all the hydro carbons it needs..reasource wise it would have access to essential almost all of the Asian land mass…we are also dependent on those same semi conductors as we are dependent on the exports from China….the moment we we blockade china our own economies go down the tank….as for having the same geographical weakness as Germany…no way…blockading china would be a practically impossible task it’s has 2000+ ports across 14,500km of coast and …unless we also blockade Russia or get Russia on side…..also china will use its allies as well to disrupt the west…Iran would be a nightmare for the west…being able to..you have not idea which way the other gulf states would go or South America…..the west could easily find itself in prolonged campaigns over most of the major chock points….anyone who thinks a war between the second largest economy in the world and the first largest will be anything other than a years long bloodbath until strategic exhaustion hits it’s not taking history into account..even Germany that was hemmed in on all sides and could be effectively blockaded and had no access to petrochemicals took 5 years to be strategically exhausted and cost 10s of millions of lives…to think china would be defeated in time for Christmas and tea and biscuits..well we have made that mistake before. Finally china has produced a navy very specifically to fight a war of attrition in the china seas and keep the US out…if china controls the china seas it cannot be blockaded even if you had the ships to cover 14,500km of coast and 2000 ports.china also has a conventional sub force of 59 electric boats, 171 larger surface combatant ( cruiser to corvette) , designed for fighting in the china seas…it would want the US and allies to come into the china seas..it’s where it’s navy is designed to fight.
Germany controlled the European landmass for its food etc.
Russias a different matter for supplying 1.5 Bill Chinese and everyone uses more oil for both fuel and petrochemicals
Germany *ports* werent blockaded like you suggest , it was a long distance blockade , same for China as its choke points some distance away are western aligned
No more Straits of Malacca, No more Panama canal or Suez canal.
Yes it will be an economic shock to the west too but more dire for China.
But in a war to exhaustion, the Panama Canal and Suez would be western weak points not Chinese…china would be getting a lots of its resources from Indian occean ports…you have to remember that effectively international trade would not occur in the same way it would be a total war situation across all sea lanes….the question would not be if Chinese Economy would suffer more..it’s which industrial infrastructure collapsed first and whose population was willing to take the suffering more…would we in the west be willing to live with a loss of our life style and hundreds of thousands of casualties..or would china be willing to take more pain….but the reality is it would be pain..more than we have ever known in any time in 75 years.
Your assessment of the current PLAN is somewhat flawed. I’d watch some of the USNI briefings and videos on the issue.
Their force structure is currently lacking ranged vessels. Their SSN fleet is far inferior to Western standards and their SSKs are noisy and easily detected.
The PLAN lacks combat experience and has zero expertise in carrier battle group high tempo operations. The PLAN lacks resupply and underway replenishment enablers to maintain their fleet on operations beyond the first island chain or 9 dash line.
When you consider the USN massive technological and operational advantages in these areas currently you can only conclude that should the USN give free reign to burn, sink, pillage the Chinese navy , commercial shipping and maintain a naval blockade the US submarine force could definitely acheive that. Loses would be around 30-40% of their SSN fleet. So huge but acceptable to win a war against a power like China.
Other comments are correct China’s raw goods would need to come in via rail and road over land from Russia, North Korea and the rest of Asia. If they can maintain in flows of raw goods they might be able to survive a naval blockade, but I’m doubting China’s economy and war industry could survive and maintain output.
It’s hard to really see how this will play out as we don’t have a birds eye view of the conflict or the benefit of hindsight. Many wars of the past have reached points in time where it looked certain one side would win or lose and yet the reverse played out with the benefit of time.
The key variable is western support for Ukraine and Chinese support for Russia. If the position changes on either end and things could change quick. If for example China decides to support Russia with hardware it would effectively nullify the support from the west.
Saying all that, it appears over the course of the year that Ukraine has gained more ground back than Russia has captured and so if that trend continues its possible they can push them out totally. Certainly cutting Russia off from crimea would be a big headache for them and potentially cause the to have to redraw from a significant landmass significantly reducing the area of combat, allowing Ukraine to focus its forces (also Russia). Only time will tell, we will have to wait a few years to find out I suspect.
I understand the pro-Russian crowd saying let’s give peace a chance. Russia has made substantial gains and the more time it has to consolidate those, the less likely Ukraine is to ever recover them. Those we need to convince are the “what’s in in for me” pro-Westerners. Those who say it was originally in the West’s interest to support Ukraine, but now Russia’s armies have been defeated, now their much vaunted S400s are susceptible to even crude drone attacks, now their navy is falling to pieces, NATO is safe and it doesn’t matter to us if Russia owns a bit of territory it didn’t before. Why should we keep paying for Ukraine’s war?
This more insidious narrative needs to be countered. Not only will Russia will not stop there, but others will say, the West is no guarantor of stability and the status quo. Ceasing support for Ukraine will either encourage them to have a go themselves in attacking their neighbour, eg China/Taiwan, or they will drift away from the West and into the orbit of a totalitarian partner who they believe is willing to guarantee their protection.
This thinking is longer-term harmful to the West and the current world order.
Indeed, the reality is Putin invaded Ukraine because he thought the West was weak and would do nothing, he got this dialogue from…
1) The west letting Russia dictate what happened in Syria.
2) The west doing nothing when Russia invade Crimea and the eastern parts of Ukraine in 2014.
3) The west doing nothing when Russia invaded Georgia in 2008
4) The west giving Afghanistan to the Taliban/ losing the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban.
5)The west doing nothing when Russian deployed nerve agents in Salisbury to assassinate an individual ( you don’t use nerve agents to assassinate someone..that was testing the west and making a point. Causing the death of a UK citizen as well as massive harm to two others and plunging a UK city into fear.
China has been watching…if the west gives up on Ukraine then china will see it as a ref enforcement of its internal debate on the viability of reunification by force.
Plus us doing very little as the PRC built artificial Islands in the South China sea, annexing & gazumping the far more credible claims of the closer nations there & the PRC ripping up the Hong Kong accord.
The list is very long.
If the west can’t guarantee its own friends and allies security that also raises the non proliferation issue. I the Gulf for a instance, we could see rush to acquire nukes as the only way to security.
Iran is at least very close plus S Arabia is supposed to have an agreemnent with Pakistan to supply them if ever needed.
After UKR gave hers up with the guarantee from ourselves & Russia of her soveriegm integrety, I don’t think there’ll be any more takers for giving nukes up.
Personally I see Ukraine building their strength and the world quietly backing Ukraine. The pressure will in time cause the Russian frontline to buckle with disruptions to the supply lines difficult to prevent. The odds seem in Ukraine’s favour. Things can always go wrong but this war is just not going right for Russia.
So the destruction of the S400 system in western Crimea allowed the Ukrainian air force to reach Sevatopol with export version Storm Shadows. But to reach and destroy the prize, the Kerch Bridge, the Ukrainians need the RAF version of the Storm Shadow with its 340 mile+ range.
I’m not sure if the smoke screens at the Kerch bridge would allow storm shadow seeker to see it.
I’m not sure that Ukraine actually have the version with a smaller range.
The list of targets is long for storm shadow
Maybe the GPS/INS systems are sufficient, If the Russian smoke generators are fixed the IIR may be able to triangulate from these positions.
Had we provided whatever was needed sooner or intervened to support UKR forces then we may have seen significant advances or convince Putin it was futile to continue his illegal genocidal war. But if you tell everybody where you’re attacking, the enemy has time to out every defence in place. I’d hope this offensive is a ruse to distract & draw in Russian forces before the main strike elsewhere. It is perverse to hold a little, if plucky, guy back while the big bully pummles him.
Great to see UKR neutralising Russian defences & radars across the NW Black sea area & littoral.
Johnson and Biden effectively invited Putin to attack. Politically they massively messed it up. Why tell a dictator if you invade a sovereign country with a population of 45 million that they are not going to lift a finger or militarily respond then of course he will see that as a green light.
We should have prepositioned 40,000 NATO troops in Eastern Poland with instructions to move into Ukraine and support the Ukrainian army the minute the Russians invaded.
Or better yet thrown a no fly zone over Ukraine guarded day and night. Any aircraft, drone, helicopter, missile or artillery shell in flight was a target. That would have changed Putin’s over confidence.
Could we have prevented the war? Sure. Just needed someone other them sleepy Joe and looney Johnson in charge.
Absolutely. Even after 6 months or a year at most demonstrating our”caution to avoid escalation” we should’ve stepped in. Putin has escalated at will & his reckless nuclear threats should’ve been immediately countered by a pledge that we would respond like for like, neutralising the threat by letting him know he ouldn’t get away with it.
We can now only hope Putin gets enough rope to hang himself. Meanwhile UKR suffers many 1,000s deaths, brutality, devestation, refugees fleeing & Russia suffers huge casualties too.
Korea would’ve been one large concentartion camp if the leaders at the time had taken the Biden-Johnson line, or Trumps for that matter as he seems to think he can play the statesman by doing a deal favourable to Russia to end the war.
I don’t agree with this assessment. The US and UK were the only two countries sounding the alarm that Russia was going to invade. We were criticized as war mongers because it was impossible! Nobody believed us. The German Intelligence chief was even caught on the ground in ukraine when his flights cancelled! The US/UK did our part. The EU and rest of the world was asleep at the wheel and didn’t care.
Yes, and what did I read Lammy say yesterday regards the EU?
“bringing the UK back out of isolation” and “putting us back as a leader in world affairs”
Oh the irony. The EU was asleep, they had not access to the intelligence we as a UKUSA country have, while we were supplying weapons and warning what was coming.
No doubt when this is all over the pivotal role played by the EU who knew all along will be highlighted and our own contributions ignored.
“Just needed someone other them sleepy Joe and looney Johnson in charge.”
Your next leader is a master at procrastination, and has a DS who is a member of Amnesty International. So good luck with your hope of decisive action.
Your proposal also involves NATO, not just 2 different leaders of the USA and UK. So it is not that simple.
Johnson did more for UK Defence than any other Prime Minister since post-Falklands Thatcher. It was very little and far too late, but still more. I don’t like the man but I’d take him back in a flash over Sunak, who is shaping up to be another Cameron, and just like Cameron he will happily sacrifice our tomorrow for his today.
Could we — the UK — have prevented the war? Sending Liz Truss, who didn’t even know that Rostov was in Russia, didn’t help. NATO troops in Poland would not have helped. I think we could have sent 10,000 UK troops on a goodwill tour of Ukraine, not Poland. It would have been one hell of a gamble and could have easily dragged us into the war, but it also might have averted it. You’d need really big spheres to try a move like that. I’m also not sure Zelensky would have extended the invitation.
I didn’t expect Sunak to prove my point quite that quickly!
The British troops may have been useful deployed in the South of Ukraine, to prevent russians from crossing over from Crimea. The Ukrainians only had one brigade of 1500 to defend the South.
Also the Ukrainian forces defending Mariupol would not have become trapped there, by russians advancing from the West, which they held out for a few months.
If only the Crimean crossings were secured, most of the South of Ukraine would be still be under UAF control. Maybe a front line near Mariupol, 6km to the east?
That would be the place now where tanks trying to break though to counter offensive to Donbas.
Yes the mine fields will still be a challenge, but in different places in the East!
10,000 British troops into Ukraine! Are you serious? That’s an awful lot – about two brigades. We have barely just 900 guys in Estonia on NATO deterrence duties – and people think that is a big commitment.
https://www.army.mod.uk/deployments/baltics/
It was not up to UK (alone) to deter the Russians from invading Ukraine – the US should have taken the lead.
It’s pretty much the most we could have sent, including denuding Estonia. I don’t think we should have. Too risky.
… denuding Estonia??
Don’t think we should have?? …what, sent troops to Estonia and Poland?
What is too risky??
Never-ending? Have we forgotten wars that took 5 or 6 years to conclude, ie the World Wars or other operations albeit not heavy metal warfighting such as Op Banner (38 years), Op Herrick (9 years or longer). The war in the Ukraine has only lasted barely 18 months.
Exactly. Too early to render a judgment re the 2025 & 2026 UKR counter-offensives. Uncertain whether F-16s will be fully integrated w/in UKR inventory by the 2024 counter-offensive.
The Iran Iraqi war took eight years….yes the west has very much forgotten that almost all wars with significant stakes generally go on until strategic exhaustion knocks one side out….sometimes you can have a beheading campaign ( the German operation against France and the Low Countries as well as the the second Iraqi war) but these tend to be the exception…and generally if it’s a large nation or a large power block it’s impossible to do that.
The will come down to who can produce the most or looking at another way, who can fund it longest. If Russia can source war supplies from the likes of China, Iran and DPRK the this can drag on for a very long time.
And Russia has the advantage that Chinese or DPRK weapons can be used in Ukraine whilst Western weapon aren’t allowed to hit Russia. So western weapons whilst more effective are limited.
Unlike the West, China, Iran or DPRK doesn’t have to answer to an electorate or fear meddling in their media as they have outright control over the narrative and justification for supporting Russia, so war weariness is not an issue.
Yes very true, the “will” to support will be key..what the west cannot do is let the totalitarian states think that the west cannot or will not support long term aims. That’s a road we don’t want to go down.
So, Will Ukraine break through before the mud? No,
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ukraine-russia-war-latest-ukrainian-armoured-vehicles-cross-russia-s-main-defensive-line/ar-AA1h29Tr
My post with link is pending approval but there are press reports today that Ukrainian armoured infantry vehicles have broke through the Russian lines west of Verbove.
Lots of minefields need to be cleared for vehicles to get through. It takes time. I doubt Ukraine has had many days off when the map doesn’t move.
This is perhaps one of the biggest challenges any army have had to undertake.
Hopefully Ukraine can keep making progress.
Brave lads ..and girls.
Extremely brave. Someone threatening your way of life and home is a real motivator.
Russias motivation must be a lot less with a lot of them saying what’s the point. Why are we here.
That’s nice…Unless 1000’s of troops, armour, recce forces and the NAFFI trucks ‘pour through’ any such breach, It will amount to nothing.
The challenge for Ukraine to forcefully remove/eliminate Russia from Ukraine is a huge one but they won’t give up. They can’t. Russia will hopefully get fed up and leave. The dead is mounting up. I’m surprised the Russian public are going along with the massive casualties
They have no idea of the extent of the casualties. That will only come out over time.
Those in the towns, villages are getting a good idea. The graveyards are filling up fast and they all know someone who’s away.
The channel 1420 does interviews with Russians and it provides a bit of insight to some people’s views.
Ukraine has no military reserves left so cant really push through russian trenches. They have a real manpower problem
Theres 8-10 mill Ukrainians living abroad , both refugees and those who left before the war on work visas , mostly eastern europe
Even those bolt holes the Russian rich and connected left for have similar but not as large Ukrainian ‘escapees’ .
The ground war is a stalemate as because of the drones even a single tank cant move without being spotted . So no battalion size forces punching through, both sides
You are incorrect they ARE passing Russian defences and taking fewer casualties the Russians. I would check your facts before posting…
There are no facts , just lies on both sides. War is always like that but its foolish to not recognise thats happening
Ukraine cant keep up the causalities while Russia can
Guess who has the larger armies and you dont know the numbers of russian causalities at all.
people on twitter arent giving facts !
I wouldn’t write Ukraine off. They have rocky 370,000 people turning 18 this and next year.
Russia won’t commit its full population so just now Ukraine still has more boots on the ground.
Russia is no easy enemy. Ukraine is doing what most European forces thought was impossible
I should add that the Russian dept of labour has ordered 330,000 death benefit so far, I’ve not got the technical term right but it allows people to claim for a lost loved one.
Thanks for that , Ive not been following all the details but thats clearly rubbish.
when a front line military unit loses 10% of its numbers , its time to be rotated out , and that includes wounded. Ukraine would have rolled over the remaining forces by now
That would make the number of russian non death casualties , if 4x the deaths to be 1.5 mill . More than the entire army two fold .
But UKDJ is full of rumours sold as fact.
In a years time or when a peace agreement is drawn Up I’ll say told you so.
No you won’t. In a few years time when your boss Mad Vlad is dead and some other Russian fascist has taken over and the Russian army has been eviscerated fighting in Ukraine, it is us, here on UKDJ that will remind you that you were wrong. Russia has suffered somewhere close to 300-400K casualties approx 150-200K deaths. That is fact, extrapolated through OSNIT and western military intelligence sources. Putin needs another round of mobilisation and 500,000 to 1 million men and women adding to the Russian army. Training, equipping and supplying these newly conscripted troops will prove very difficult. Besides, whose going to join? I wouldn’t when the Russian population must by now know that conscripts have a 50-75% chance of ending up a casualty statistic.
Putin doesn’t care for Russia’s suffering. He willingly will send a million or more Russians to die in Ukraine. Sadly it seems Russia will have to pay the price in blood before they wake up and in a violent uprising chuck Putin and his malodorous oligarch cronies out of the Kremlin.
Unbelievable nonsense. You are like a 15 yr follower of a teenage boyband with this OSINT stuff.
The real intell neither you nor I are privy too, and naturally Ukraine is playing the Bodyguaqrd of Lies playbook to the hilt.
There was a bit of the curtain lifted when the national Guardsman in the USAF intelligence wing published the real info from the american sources, its much more difficult for Zelensky than his fan club knows…cue weeping and tears into the pillows. But thats fine, enjoy the fanatsy life,as you and the 8-10 mill Ukrainains overseas can sleep well.
Enjoy your fantasy life Duker. I know the truth and the truth will out. The numbers I quoted to you are unfortunately for the Russian fascist Nazi scum all too accurate.
Silly silly man.
Yep you really really are. Pathetic
Little Drummer boy, loves these war fantasys
Take a look in a mirror sometime fella. You really are a toxic character. I’m sure your mum is really very proud of her daft son.
Sorry that should read disease benefit not death. That came from a Russian.
See ur thinking the whole Russian population is mobilised and it isn’t. They went in with 150k soldiers. Then pulled in another 100k when things went wrong. Then mobilised 300-400k. Most of them went in.
Wagner put in 50k minimum. Now there have 180-250k estimated left. Do the maths.
That’s 300k injured and 150k dead. Roughy estimates. Oh and Wagner 45k lost that Wagner said.
Ukraine has Awful casualties also.
Russia can leave. Ukraine has nowhere to leave to. So it’s up to Russia to end the madness.
So could russia get more people. Of course. Is it worth collapsing a generation. Not really.
The standard rule of thumb always was that Combat Effectiveness is so depleted when 30% casualties (killed, wounded, missing) are reached, that that unit is reconstituted or disbanded. Otherwise, they soldier on.
Not heard any mantra about 10% casualties – that is very low. Unit just needs topping up with BCRs. Don’t see a need to rotate out.
[I recall that years ago a Para battalion expected 10% to be injured from a parachute jump – the battalion would have just carried on with the war. I am sure that 10% figure is much less these days due to better chutes and techniques, but ‘Airborne’ will update, I am sure].
Roughly not rocky
A major tipping point will be reached when Ukraine can sever Russian links to Crimea. Then Russian forces there will become unsupportable. The political impact of this in Russia may cause change in Russia. It is likely that advances in the south will bring Ukraine firepower in range of the coast. Cutting the land bridge. The bridge connecting Russia to Crimea is not up to supplying the Russian forces by itself. This bridge too may fall too.
So I think there may be a tipping point where Russia considers withdrawal the best option. There is president – Afghanistan.
It must also be remembered that sometimes long wars are worth fighting – WW2.
Then why was Nato fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan – long wars worth fighting for ?
Its a funny thing some people want others to do the dying for their beliefs
I did NOT say all wars were worth fighting long or short. I did NOT suggest I wanted others to be killed for me. You have misrepresented my comments. If NATO went into Ukraine it would start WW3… is that what you think we should do! If so you are quite mad. You also implied I was in favour of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq this is incorrect, as it happens I think people in general should sort out their own countries as intervention hardly ever works. In the case of Ukraine they have asked for our help against a rapacious, criminal state, it is right that we should help them.
War should always be a last resort….
You said long wars are *worth fighting for*, but as long as its not you!
. This is what Ukraine is and will continue as you have these bizarre ways for them to win as though its the answer . Long wars happen when there is no backing down.
there was a chance at peace early on but Boris and Biden scuppered Zelenskys peace mission to Istanbul who met face to face with Putins people before the Ukrainians ‘disappeared without warning’
It is quit obvious you are grinding your own axe and are determined to misrepresent me so I will leave you to it – have fun….
Duker has a similar but more abrasive “tone” as Johnski from Milton Keynes then Faroe islands via a basement in Moscow or St Petersburg. The tone of these guys reflects the frustrations and anger within the Russian handlers and their political masters. Russia is at best in a stalemate situation with Ukraine, at worst losing in Ukraine. If the West can maintain supplies of hardware and Ukraine is willing to keep fighting then yes they could win.
“If NATO went into Ukraine it would start WW3… is that what you think we should do! If so you are quite mad.”
I agree. There are Hawks here who will disagree though.
NATO was not involved in Iraq, only some members of NATO like U.S and U.K, Italy. Some NATO countries opposed involvement in Iraq like France Germany.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_166936.htm
Westerners believe that if Putin is replaced the sucessor Will be less agressive, they have no idea about the real situation in Russia, believe me, it would be much worse than now. Falcóns are waiting its time in the Kremlin.
It depends really how putin falls. If it’s a civilian uprising and the protests won’t stop until they have free and fair elections that is different to putin having a long fall from a window pushed by most psychotic person that is close to him in power grab.