I'll be honest, the effects of halting electricity exports to Finland by Russia has been negligible. The Finns are not in darkness lol.
Russia-Ukraine War
- Thread starter Kool-Aid
- Start date
Abdisamad
VIP
It seems like Russia is losing the war both economically and militarily... Putin made a big mistake by attacking Ukraine.. All in all it has been a big failure.. Apart from their nuclear arsenal the Russians seem to have a very weak military.
Nilotic
VIP
The war has not been a total failure, but it has exposed operational deficiencies in the Russian military; the quality of their command and control structure, communications and logistics are far below that of Western militaries.
The Russians are making gradual gains the Donbass; the Russians now control over 50% of the Donbass and the Ukrainians will not be able to stop them from taking all of it.
An attacking force (in military logic) is supposed to be 3x the size of the defenders; in Ukraine the opposite is true and only 20% of the Russian army is deployed there.
Russia has not lost economically in fact it has gained something by making the ruble stronger. As for the military situation, it's bit complicated because we aren't getting the full picture.
Western media is claiming that Ukrainian forces are making gains through counter-offensives but we don't know how true that is and even if it is true how significant are these gains in fact.
The Russians are still carrying on their offensives in the southern part of Ukraine including the eastern regions of Donbas. They have also advanced on Kharkiv in the Northeast but again apparently the Ukrainians have "pushed" them back.
Yes, it seems that the Russians are struggling most of all with their logistics but this has arguably always been the weak point of the Russian army.
People forget that Ukraine is the biggest European nation entirely within Europe and is the size of Germany and France put together. The distances and areas to cover is quite vast. I believe any army would struggle to supply its army in such a land.
Nilotic
VIP
I agree with you about the military dynamics in Ukraine, however, the economic trajectory of Russia has dimmed significantly; by the end of this war, Russia's economy will be half of what it is now.
Abdisamad
VIP
I see.. But I fail to understand why the Russians deployed with only 20% of their army and another thing I don't understand is why they didn't use bombers before the ground invasion.. I remember when the Americans invaded Iraq they bombed Iraq with heavy bombers such as the B52 who carried out carpet bombings.. The Russian just sent in their army before even conducting any bombings.. And what's with the steel plant they haven't taken it over yet..
Maybe so but the Russians will survive in any case. They have been through far worse in their history. The West has always had an economic edge over the Russians, I don't see that changing any time soon.
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Abdisamad
VIP
You don't have permission to view the spoiler content.
Log in or register now.
Nilotic
VIP
That's precisely what has stunned us all; it seems that the Russians should have deployed significantly more troops for a war that involves NATO providing intelligence, supplies, weapons and ammunition to the Ukrainians.
The Russian air force also seems strangely incapable of conducting SEAD operations and this is exactly why they've been unable to unleash the full strength of their air force in areas they don't control.
The intel that the Russians used was way off; they then compounded the problem by using light units at the onset of the war and the result was a disaster; they also made virtually no use of reconnaissance or artillery.
The sprawling steel plant was designed by the Soviet Union to withstand a nuclear strike; it is itself the size of a small town and has catacombs underneath it and the Ukrainians have been planning for this very situation for 8 years.
Logistics:
The Russians apparently only have 4000 trucks at hand whereas the Americans have a total of 100, 000 trucks -- hence the glaring disparity in logistical abilities.
Last edited:
Where are you getting your info for the Russian airforce operations? I agree that the Russian airforce has been somewhat hampered by anti-aerial weapons supplied to Ukraine by NATO but the Russians are still conducting airstrikes on military targets and supply depots. Even the Ukrainians aren't denying that kkkk.
It could be that the Russians started off deploying weaker green units to test the strength of the Ukrainians but that's just my personal assumption. The stronger more experienced units were deployed to more important and strategic locations like the Donbas and southern Ukraine.
They did make use of artillery bombardments lol. Did you not see the way they were damaging Kyiv at the start of the war? Not to mention reducing Mariupol to absolute rubble with constant shelling.
Also, I really doubt the Russians have only 4,000 tanks for an invasion of this scale. Though the Russians are kind of inept at logistics they aren't stupid.
Nilotic
VIP
The fact that the Russians are still shooting down Ukrainian fixed wing aircraft this far into the war means that they have yet to establish air dominace in Ukraine.
No military deploys weaker, inexperienced troops first, and if they did, well...that's stupid and criminally negligent; the Russians used their special forces and elite airborne troops in their initial failed attempts to take the airfields just outside of Kiev.
The Russians were being picked off in Northern Ukraine because they weren't using artillery ahead of their troops formations; this was a departure from their usual way of conducting war -- and it cost them dearly.
Mariupol was destroyed in the 2nd phase of the war; the Russians reverted to their tried and tested method of war -> extensive use of heavy artillery bombardment.
Kiev doesn't seem to have suffered a great deal of damage.
There are multiple sources on the dearth of military trucks in the Russian army and they all line up with the figure I cited.
The Russians are the ones in the air who can strike any position they wish, even if the Ukrainians have anti-aerial weapons it's hard to imagine that they're shooting down every jet they encounter.
How do you think inexperienced troops become experienced? By engaging the enemy, of course, they received training in the military before they were deployed. That is how militaries work, you can't just keep them back all the time.
I don't know where you getting info that artillery was not used before infantry deployments, that's not how Russians conduct combat operations kkkk.
And yes special forces were deployed to take the airfields outside of Kyiv and managed to do so but then the Russians eventually withdrew of their own accord later on. They did this to focus on the Donbas and the south.
Mariupol was already being shelled before the 2nd phase as you call it, it was just intensified later on. Kyiv was certainly being damaged extensively, especially in the outskirts. So many people fled because of the shelling.
I'm still unconvinced about these "sources" related to Russian truck numbers tbh.
Ukraine lost Mariopol and Donbass region to Russia.
