Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Russia-Ukraine War (Threadbanned in op)

1121122124126127169

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 758 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    @Francie Barrett how do statements like this help Putin?

    Or deliberately shelling a supermarket of no military value yesterday?

    Tell us more of Putin’s plan as it seems you had a good peek at them



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,618 ✭✭✭✭Mr. CooL ICE


    I was in Berlin in February last year and I seem to recall a destroyed T90 tank placed in front of the russian embassy, which is walking distance from the Reichstag. So Medvedev isn't far off; just not in the way he intended.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 758 ✭✭✭thatsdaft




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,502 ✭✭✭Dubh Geannain


    Big list

    Summary-

    Russia had 29 pieces of artillery damaged or destroyed. 1 Grad and 2 2S3 were destroyed. The 2S3 were probably old, but are newly documented. 22 guns had their barrels destroyed or breach damaged. The breach damage may destroy the gun, you'd need follow up footage to understand how much damage the gun suffered, though.

    3 tanks were abandoned and 1 damaged.

    8 IFVs were destroyed, and 1 damaged

    Russia had 14 trucks destroyed and 16 more damaged. They also lost 8 more transport vehicles.

    Russia had 116 assets damaged, abandoned, or destroyed

    Ukraine had 27 assets damaged, abandoned, or destroyed

    1 boat sunk

    1 tank destroyed and 1 more damaged

    1 ifv damaged

    1 apc abandoned, 1 destroyed, 1 damaged

    1 mrap destroyed

    and they lost 6 transport vehicles.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,502 ✭✭✭Dubh Geannain


    Some sources are saying they lost another ka-52 this morning.



  • Advertisement
  • Administrators Posts: 14,263 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Big Bag of Chips


    @Francie Barrett and @I.am.Putins.raging.bile.duct if you have a personal spat with each other take it elsewhere. Don't derail the thread by arguing with each other. It's tedious for posters who are interested in discussing the topic to have to scroll through.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 758 ✭✭✭thatsdaft




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 202 ✭✭Repo101


    The excursions into Russia are both bad and good for Ukraine. On one hand it's a massive distraction for Russia and will mean they will have to reinforce the border once more. However, it also shows that Ukraine needs a distraction to try and stop the slow and attrional loss of land on the front.

    It will be more interesting to see if Ukraine decides to make any tangible changes at the front because, at the moment, I can only see one side being able to sustain this in the long term and this looks like they will be qt it for quite some time yet.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭TheValeyard


    Belarus at it again

    Probably hoping Ukraine moves troops North. Doubt Ukraine will fall for it.

    All eyes on Kursk. Slava Ukraini.



  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 80,674 Mod ✭✭✭✭Sephiroth_dude


    Mod

    I.am.Putins.raging.bile.duct thread banned.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 167 ✭✭JimmyChew


    Is it fair to say after recent developments that a tactical nuclear strike by RuZZia is now off the table as an option for Putin? I mean this is the biggest of many steps across this red line that he spoke about.

    Hear me out..

    NATO would have had to have a big say in this operation and they would have had their intelligence on what the possible/likely outcomes could be and they surely gave the green light. Its highly unlikely Ukraine would have done a solo run here without the say so of the "Allies" so in turn NATO, not wanting to see Article 5 triggered by a tactical nuke strike gave the thumbs up?

    I know it was a lot of sabre rattling by Putin over the last few years RE mass destruction weapons but we just never knew where they were at. Now that Ukraine have taken the fight to RuZZian soil & "threatened their sovereignty" and they still haven't unleashed their reported tactical nuke weapons are we confident they either cant or wont any time soon?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,393 ✭✭✭Suckler


    I'd agree with the good and bad for Ukraine. Whilst the Ukrainian invasion was a great morale booster from their point of view, it heaps pressure on Russia/Putin to respond in a way that will (a) reclaim the lost area and then some, and (b) give Russia a similar morale/propaganda boost. This is worrying as Putin would have to do something overly drastic to ensure the win and ensure that it has the necessary panache to dissuade future Ukrainian invasion and quell any potential concern for his leadership. Chemical weapons & leaning more on Lukashenko to get Belarus directly involved are potentially on the table. Best course of action in my (completely militarily unqualified) view would be to mine the pockets they invade and pull back to their borders creating buffer zones - Only one side could sustain the invasion(s) long term.



  • Registered Users Posts: 180 ✭✭Roald Dahl


    I think the Ukrainian Special Military Operation is an overwhelmingly positive occurrence.

    Russia in its seething arrogance has committed its entire capability to Ukraine, never pausing to think they could be on the receiving end themselves. We are reminded of Bomber Harris commenting on Germany.

    The world now sees Russia as being a spent force and all they have left are these fictional nuclear bombs, which even if a handful of them do actually exist and are actually capable of launching, will never be used.

    It is time for the unwilling hostages in the Russian Federation to claim their independence.

    It is time for Russia to be soundly defeated, occupied, demilitarised, dismantled and its war criminals to be rounded up to face justice.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,526 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    I'm not sure why you call it a distraction - Ukraine are opening up another front. They obviously have the capacity to do it and it is a smart move. When people talk about how Ukraine is prepared to give up land in order to cause maximum losses to Russia, by attacking where Russia is weak they will also cause substantial Russian losses. The ultimate aim is to bring the Russian armed forces to a point of failure, and the Kursk attack is testing the Russians in a number of areas.

    Ukraine are seizing the momentum because, even though as you say Russia can't keep this up long term, Ukraine have to demonstrate that they can take the initiative whenever they want. The idea would be that rather than wait 3 years for a grinding victory over Russia, they would rather have the war end earlier.

    Not saying that this will be a point of critical failure for Russia, but this is the type of thing can can bring it about.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,642 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    So is this war going to turn into another Vietnam where it will drag on for years on end.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,689 ✭✭✭greenpilot


    NATO missed this memo...



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,600 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    How many soldiers are in a ukranian brigade?
    Do we know how many brigades have invaded Russia?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 202 ✭✭Repo101


    It's a distraction as it has yet to be seen whether or not Ukraine will be able to sustain any territory in Russia. If they can then it could be a game changer. The difference in a tangible move and a distraction will ultimately depend on the outcome. Right now, I would suspect this is short term. Ukraine won't be able to supply troops if they try and cut deeper into Russia. In my opinion it's not sustainable other than creating a distraction and moving men and weapons away from the front on both sides.

    Even if it is short term, should Ukraine use this as a means to push Russia back at the front then it would obviously be a massive success but I suspect we would need to see more territory along the border taken for Russia to have to massively recalibrate in a way that gives Ukraine the initiative at the front.

    As for the war of attrition, when I say one side can win, that is Russia as they have more weapons and more men.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 758 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    at least 4 brigades, 6000 people reported yesterday



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,350 ✭✭✭Deub


    A distraction would have been Ukraine going there and being pushed back within few hours. I mean, we are talking about a country that claimed to have a strong and unlimited soldiers.

    How come after 4 days, Ukraine is still going?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,422 ✭✭✭nigeldaniel


    I will just park this here.

    Dan.



  • Registered Users Posts: 887 ✭✭✭SchrodingersCat


    Not sure. Alot could depend on this US election in November. Harris and in particular Walz have shown much support for Ukraine and will continue to support them. It would be fantastic if they gave more support than Biden, the country easily has the capacity to do so. Congress will be the deciding factor again. Most suspect Trump will pull support but im not 100% convinced. More than likely yes, but he is a wildcard. The brass of the military might convince him how its in Americas interest to continue support. The US is getting incredible value for money in funding Ukraine in taking down a competing world power. If Trump does pull support, the EU might pick up some of the slack. If Trump wanted to be a super dick about it he could limit the EU owned US weaponry that they want to forward on to Ukraine. If that happens Ukraine will be in a very very difficult situation. It also depends on Germany and France wanting to give support, which is no guarantee either.

    Then again, the Russian economy could collapse tomorrow, who knows.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,600 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Where are you getting that info from do ya mind me asking?
    Im reading brigades are 1000 in strength and other sources are saying Ukrainian brigades can be up to 5k in strength, so possibly 10k soldiers?

    Hard to know who to believe!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,819 ✭✭✭zv2


    “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” — Voltaire



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 758 ✭✭✭thatsdaft


    Seems to be up to 10k now references here

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_2024_Kursk_Oblast_incursion

    I posted tweet few pages back that Russians initially claimed 1000, and then 4 different brigade patches were seen from video and photos coming out, including a video of them driving over abandoned border post

    Could very well that Ukrainians themselves are surprised at the success and now pouring more men in as this is ending up a Turkey shoot of untrained Russians who line up literally on roads to be ambushed and killed

    Todays ISW report talks about “significant” Russian redeployments from south and east (which itself makes this a huge success in short term)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,465 ✭✭✭macraignil


    "

    As for the war of attrition, when I say one side can win, that is Russia as they have more weapons and more men.

    "

    Spoken like a true putin fanboy. You have taken note that the invasion of Ukraine by putin's terrorists has not been going very well for them and they have lost huge quantities of their trained military forces and equipment?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,134 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Pretty sure it's in Ukraine's interest right now to put out many conflicting reports of exactly how many soldiers are involved in this incursion in order to confuse the Russians and make them entirely unsure how much resources to commit.



  • Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,526 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Russia may have more weapons, but they are inferior weapons. They may have a larger population, but they don't have the same amount of dedicated and professional volunteers that Ukraine have.

    So Russia will send wave after wave of mobilised troops, mercenaries, duped immigrant workers and prisoners at the Ukranians using cold war era and North Korean equipment and munitions. How you figure from that that Russia is the only side that can win is utterly beyond me.

    But then again, maybe you have sources of information that are not available to me!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,600 ✭✭✭✭tom1ie


    Absolutely agree.
    However I’m looking for stats on how many are in a Ukrainian brigade usually.
    seems to be conflicting info.
    Or is it that a brigade is a brigade regardless of country?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,502 ✭✭✭Dubh Geannain


    Well it's a great distraction isn't it?

    Yesterday's equipment losses -

    Then there's also the abandoned Russian equipment from fleeing forces that Ukraine have managed to get. I've not seen as much detail in terms of munitions acquired but stuff like this

    Ukrainian Forces Capture Valuable Russian T-72B3 Tanks (msn.com)

    One particularly notable find is an abandoned T-72B3 tank near the town of Sudzha. This model, equipped with advanced thermal imaging cameras, represents a significant loss for the Russian military.



Advertisement