Prediction Thread: When Will Ukraine Conquer Russia

[N35t0r]

Also, he rallied his nation against an attack from Russia, who is committing genocide and war crimes against them. But yeah, this is probably minor.

[Berzerker]

Zelensky is Time's man of the year

he survived 2022 without being disappeared by the CIA, Ukrainian Nazis and his own military

credit to black in the empire

[BeBMan]

The issue is that the Russians have revealed themselves to be weak and incompetent (due to corruption, primarily). Thus we are now led to have doubts of Russian competence, just like we were pretty sure of Russian competence in February and March. Now I guess it would be reasonable to say that just like we were wrong to be sure in February and March, so we should expect to be wrong about our judgements now... but I think that shouldn't change our judgements, just our confidence in our judgements.

I do think that pushing a peaceful resolution right now (which means that Ukraine doesn't get the full victory that they might deserve) might be the most logical thing to do, when one considers the probabilities.

JM

Given the massivev loss of life already ending the war would be the responsible thing to do indeed. But Putin himself signaled now it could be protracted, which means he is in no mood to give up his goals:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/07/vladimir-putin-says-russias-war-on-ukraine-could-be-long-term-process

The question now is if he really thinks he can still achieve his maximalist goals, or if he moved himself into a corner where he's afraid ending the war without success would damage his position at home irreparably.

Otoh there's - understandably - no appetite in Ukraine for compromises that allow Putin to declare some sort of victory now and then do the same again as soon as his military recovered.

[Berzerker]

Interview with Angela Merkel, one subject was the Minsk Accord - she said that was to give Ukraine time to build up its military, not to end the war in the Donbas

[Berzerker]

Eastern Ukrainians were attacked for not supporting a right wing coup that removed the man they overwhelmingly voted for. Imagine if Jan 6 was a coup and Trump sent his right wing militias to attack Oregon for rejecting his authority. Why did the Minsk Accords fail? Wasn't Russia. Why did Zelensky get elected on a peace platform and do next to nothing to end the war? Because he's a puppet, the Ukrainian right wing and the US wanted the war in the Donbas and Zelensky would have been killed if he actually tried to end it. Notice how Azov didn't attack Crimea? We drew that line to keep Russia from getting really pissed off, but the people of the Donbas were an acceptable target.

Follow the $$$..... Wall St is ripping us off, Ukrainians are ripping us off, an African minister recently said terrorists are getting weapons from Ukraine. And now some congresscritter from the state of Washington (Adam Smith - D) has accused people who want to audit the money trail of spreading Russian propaganda. Thats why they hate Trump, this war wouldn't be happening if Trump was in the WH.

I suppose there are several schools of thought, one seeks to weaken Russia and divide it from our western subjects (mainly Germany) because Russia has resources for sale and we want a cut of the action and do not want Russia and Germany getting friendly. Another (the Trump camp) sees China as the big threat and sought to ease tensions with Russia to weaken their alliance. Both are treating China as the threat and want to deal with Russia with the carrot or the stick.

[N35t0r]

The issue is that the Russians have revealed themselves to be weak and incompetent (due to corruption, primarily). Thus we are now led to have doubts of Russian competence, just like we were pretty sure of Russian competence in February and March. Now I guess it would be reasonable to say that just like we were wrong to be sure in February and March, so we should expect to be wrong about our judgements now... but I think that shouldn't change our judgements, just our confidence in our judgements.

I do think that pushing a peaceful resolution right now (which means that Ukraine doesn't get the full victory that they might deserve) might be the most logical thing to do, when one considers the probabilities.

JM

Russia lost the first Chechen war, made peace, and faked some bombings a couple of years later to go back and flatten the place to the stone age.

Six years ago they invaded and unilaterally annexed Crimea, and since some months later have been supplying and arming separatists in the east.

What makes you think anything signed by Russia's is worth more than the paper it's written on?

[Jon Miller]

The issue is that the Russians have revealed themselves to be weak and incompetent (due to corruption, primarily). Thus we are now led to have doubts of Russian competence, just like we were pretty sure of Russian competence in February and March. Now I guess it would be reasonable to say that just like we were wrong to be sure in February and March, so we should expect to be wrong about our judgements now... but I think that shouldn't change our judgements, just our confidence in our judgements.

I do think that pushing a peaceful resolution right now (which means that Ukraine doesn't get the full victory that they might deserve) might be the most logical thing to do, when one considers the probabilities.

JM

[PLATO]

Uhmn, that is a quote from a movie

Of course it is a quote from a movie! Red October to be specific. That doesn't make it less of an interesting statement though.

I'm pretty sure that the Russians expected a fast victory so they could turn Ukraine into a new Belarus domain. I'm also pretty sure that they in no circumstances saw them self in what is going on now.

Totally agree, but that doesn't mean that they haven't formulated a new plan due to where they are. The question here was "long war" or "Quick war" as a Russian goal. The presenter favors "quick war" due, mainly, to high usage of limited weapon systems and expenditure of newly conscripted troops. The question I raise is "shouldn't we consider that the Russians are capable of thinking things through just as much as this guy?"

Nukes ? Well, I'm pretty sure that Putin won't use that because of his history - he knows what using nukes mean, but it seems that there are russian nutcases that doesn't understand the MAD concept.

Agree here as well. I think Putin may have considered tactical nukes, but the West made it obvious to him that using them was the end of the Russian Army in Ukraine.

[BlackCat]

Hmm, ok, I didn't know tthat. I heard the motorized could do it in 3-5 minutes. That includes firing three times using an autoloader, pickup the stabilizing legs using hydronic systems, then drive off. You are sure Towed artillery can match that?

Well, technically, the setup for a 105 is a PITA (lots of nasty geometric and geographical measurements - you should know the drill) but since they are first revealed by the first shot, it doesn't matter that much - if the unit is intended for fire and retreat, then it's basically putting the cannon somewhere, digging some holes for the legs, having the pulling unit parked just behind the cannon and wait to all units in the battery are clear.

Firing six rounds take a minute with a bit of practice, packing down and be ready for draw yet another minute or two, and after 4-5 minutes repositioned some 100 meters away.

That is for the 105 - the 155 (WWII) is a bit more quarrelsome - it needed to heave up the unit to protect the wheels and lowering again before deployment.

[BlackCat]

While I do follow his logic (and agree with it to an extent), I keep hearing Fred Thompson saying "Russians don't take a dump without a plan, son"

Uhmn, that is a quote from a movie - I'm pretty sure that the Russians expected a fast victory so they could turn Ukraine into a new Belarus domain. I'm also pretty sure that they in no circumstances saw them self in what is going on now.

Nukes ? Well, I'm pretty sure that Putin won't use that because of his history - he knows what using nukes mean, but it seems that there are russian nutcases that doesn't understand the MAD concept.

[Dinner]

The shoot and scoot time for towed and motorized units are close to each other. The real difference is that the motorized thingy are faster to deploy and have better targeting equipment.

Hmm, ok, I didn't know tthat. I heard the motorized could do it in 3-5 minutes. That includes firing three times using an autoloader, pickup the stabilizing legs using hydronic systems, then drive off. You are sure Towed artillery can match that?

[PLATO]

Ah, more Puck stuff to put into your throats :

While I do follow his logic (and agree with it to an extent), I keep hearing Fred Thompson saying "Russians don't take a dump without a plan, son"

[PLATO]

The shoot and scoot time for towed and motorized units are close to each other. The real difference is that the motorized thingy are faster to deploy and have better targeting equipment.

Wiki shows about 2.5 minutes for setup and same for moving out for M777. It shows quite a bit more for older artillery pieces. Not sure what Russian designed systems can do.

[BlackCat]

Ah, more Puck stuff to put into your throats :

[BlackCat]

Towed artillery is pretty out of date and can only really be used if the other side doesn't have effective modern counter battery fire systems. Motorized artillery, so you can shoot and scoot, is really the only sustainable was to go on the modern battlefield.

The shoot and scoot time for towed and motorized units are close to each other. The real difference is that the motorized thingy are faster to deploy and have better targeting equipment.