Russia - threadbanned users in OP

Agreed. We need a better quality bot. This one sounds just like it's predecessors - make outrageous claim, yell about not doing your research for you, deny, deflect, lie.

Sigh. Slow day on Orwell Street.

The collapse in Kherson was due to good work of precision long range artillery/bombing of a few key bridges the russian relied on to supply their garrison. It wasnt a combined arms tanks and infantry overrunning russian positions, they retreated because they knew eventually they would be cut off from behind due to bridges and pontoons being cut.

Kharkiv was more maneuver warfare with fast advances causing the understrength russian mobik garrisons to retreat, and their failure to prepare any kind of defensive line (trench digging equipment embezzled by one of the Russian healy-raes), meant that they either had to yield ground or die. Many died, but they still had to yield all the ground. That was more like Soviet "deep-battle" tactics, taking advantage of the Russians trying to hold an entire front with a weak elastic defense, by attacking multiple points with quick moving armor and DRGs. When they did get the breakthrough they sped well ahead undermining the entire russian defense. But it wasnt reliant on aircraft or artillery - Ukrainian artillery at the time could scarcely keep up with the rate the DRGs were pushing into occupied territory.

Artillery and infantry as combined arms, where have I heard that before. Ah yes, WW1 style "combined arms" - trenches and relying on rolling artillery barrages to advance. The MBTs are no good in the advance without infantry support due to high prevalence of ATGMs around, and the infantry are no good under the face of artillery barrages. Counter battery is the name of the game (in the absence of air superiority, which no side has), and right now Ukraine do not have enough artillery to do counter battery effectively.

The substantial amount of artillery pieces given to Ukraine is not 'at present', that was all last year. The deliveries have slowed down a lot, along with shells, both of which are what they really need if they want to take back the occupied territories.

What is this historical revisionism already?

The Russian retreat out of Kherson was (sadly) with few casualties due to the Ukrainian advance not coming close to the Russians as they retreated over the Dnieper. There was no spearhead through defences forcing them to flee across, it was like a month long evacuation from Kherson, first they looted, then moved some civilians, admin, emptied the banks, etc, then finally pulled the troops across.

It was planned as a result of the excellent work of HIMARs making their supply lines too precarious, but it wasnt a combined arms epic success that spearheaded through their defenses and made them run with their tails between their legs.

If nothing else, kudos for exploring a new angle on the Ukrainian invasion and Ireland's involvement that we haven't seen here before. I don't think religion of any flavour comes into it with Putin and his ilk. Although he's quite happy to manipulate those naiive enough, if it helps him to achieve his objectives.

I think we're going to see a lot more of this as the War progresses. The go-to tactic will be "The War must end now! Stop the killing", but the meaning is essentially "We've probably reached the limit of our likely gains, and now want to hold onto what we've got with a frozen frontline."

They're still getting bits of Donbas in the last few weeks, and probably will get bits more over time. But it does look like Ukraine is arming for a major assault, and if Solidar and their glacial creep towards Bakmut is the best they can pull off with their current human-wave tactics, then I think the Kremlin now know that they might need to move now to get some sort of "peace" before those losses are likely reversed.

So now we get Russian-backed Boardsies screaming for peace. When our current guest departs, several more will probably appear with a very similar message. Hell, they've even got Trump doing it too "truthing" about how easy it is to end the war. I expect this talking point to increase with urgency over time.

The F-16 wish is about the platform and the variety of US weapons it can carry and lob from 10,000m, not doing low altitude ground attack in range of manpads. Aerial warfare is all about energy, from how long the batteries in your DJI drone last to how far a glide bomb can travel depending on release height. Most of the battlefield danger from manpads is for low flying aircraft below 5,000m. For long range radars and SAMs, the F-16 can cary HARMs.

As a general rule of thumb, it seems pretty clear to me that the Ukrainian military are very smart, and are not asking for stuff as armchair warriors, that they can't use or don't need.

A significant current issue, recognised by all allied parties, is that Ukraine needs a capabiity to precision strike out to about 200km. The Orcs are now placing stuff like big ammo dumps 180km from the line of conflict. Ukraine needs to be able to hit these. The F-16 can carry a whole host of US weapons, and I think that's the big advantage - flexibility. Altitude is potential energy, so the higher you can release or fire a wepon at the ground, the further it's range

Maybe all this talk is a stalking horse for Ukraine getting Gray Eagles. 'Oh that's a relief, they only got Gay Eagles instead of F-16s'

How can you be certain about the ‘shambolic’ nature of the Russian military……war will be over shortly so…?