Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] 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 [email protected]

Ukrainian Army tactics

  • 29-08-2014 9:14am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 13,456 ✭✭✭✭


    Mods, please move if not the right place.

    Why isn't the Ukrainian army's first objective to secure the entire border with Russia?
    Without the supply of equipment and personnel from Russia, the separatists should be easily defeated.

    Is it because there's too high a risk of Russia claiming Ukraine did something that would allow it to invade?

    Also, the recent Nato satellite photos, while clear, had smaller detailing than I would have expected from a military satellite. Have I been watching too much James Bond or would Nato be reluctant to advertise the full capabilities of their satellites?


Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭galwaycyclist


    josip wrote: »
    Mods, please move if not the right place.

    Why isn't the Ukrainian army's first objective to secure the entire border with Russia?
    Without the supply of equipment and personnel from Russia, the separatists should be easily defeated.

    Is it because there's too high a risk of Russia claiming Ukraine did something that would allow it to invade?

    Also, the recent Nato satellite photos, while clear, had smaller detailing than I would have expected from a military satellite. Have I been watching too much James Bond or would Nato be reluctant to advertise the full capabilities of their satellites?

    <Armchair general>
    Tempting idea but if I was the Ukrainians I would be keeping the bulk of my forces back out of likely contact in case the Russians do actually invade in force. If the Ukainians did commit more substantial forces in the south east they might just invite encirclement by the Russians. Also the thought occurs that leaving the border "porous" might also allow the Russians a way to withdraw their existing forces in Ukraine gracefully if that was on the cards.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,205 ✭✭✭✭hmmm


    josip wrote: »
    Mods, please move if not the right place.

    Why isn't the Ukrainian army's first objective to secure the entire border with Russia?
    Without the supply of equipment and personnel from Russia, the separatists should be easily defeated.
    They tried that, and were trapped after a rebel counterattack in what became known as the Luhansk pocket. See the blue in the bottom right below.

    BuDyu7sCUAAiDZZ.jpg:medium

    The Ukrainians claimed that their troops in the pocket were shelled by Russian artillery, which is a claim that has become increasingly believable. Most troops left their weapons behind and ran into Russia for safety.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Ukraine would be mad to try and hold the border.
    troops stretched far too thin
    enemy behind them
    constant harrassing fire from inside russias borders

    best bet is to encircle the main cities and clear them, like fallujah was by the USA with superior air support and then move your units into garrisons in the cities using roadblocks and checkpoints to disarm everyone.
    Also
    pound any units trying to attack you with air support and counter SAM like HARM... im sure ukraine simply doesnt have this capability.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,753 ✭✭✭comongethappy


    They tried creating a border buffer behind the rebels & Russia, but sustained artillery fire from Russia made too risky.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    josip wrote: »

    Also, the recent Nato satellite photos, while clear, had smaller detailing than I would have expected from a military satellite. Have I been watching too much James Bond or would Nato be reluctant to advertise the full capabilities of their satellites?

    More than likely "low res" versions are what the public get to see.

    This was also one of the questions raised about flight MH370 (the one that vanished) that a number of governments are staying quiet about what they may or may not have tracked. It wouldn't surprise me if true and don't think you'd have to a conspiracy theorist to agree.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,289 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Five Lamps wrote: »
    More than likely "low res" versions are what the public get to see.

    This was also one of the questions raised about flight MH370 (the one that vanished) that a number of governments are staying quiet about what they may or may not have tracked. It wouldn't surprise me if true and don't think you'd have to a conspiracy theorist to agree.

    Oh good another one

    You can guarantee the American satellites can Show if the average Russian grunt has shaved or not on a particular day .
    There hardly going to show just how capable they are at high resolution imaging of foreign territories.
    For some reason we seem to be getting civilian satellite images rather than spy satellite images


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Gatling wrote: »
    Oh good another one

    You can guarantee the American satellites can Show if the average Russian grunt has shaved or not on a particular day .
    There hardly going to show just how capable they are at high resolution imaging of foreign territories.
    For some reason we seem to be getting civilian satellite images rather than spy satellite images

    That's what I just said.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,176 ✭✭✭ZeroThreat


    Five Lamps wrote: »
    That's what I just said.

    The longer this particular conflict drags out, the more time the Baltic states have to prepare for when the unsleeping eye Putin in mordor mother Russia inevitably turns his gaze towards them.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,289 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    ZeroThreat wrote: »
    The longer this particular conflict drags out, the more time the Baltic states have to prepare for when the unsleeping eye Putin in mordor mother Russia inevitably turns his gaze towards them.

    The problem is there tiny compared to Russian holiday makers who drive fancy heavy armour ,

    I'd love to see Poland and the smaller nations from a colilation and send troops to help defend Ukraine


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,316 ✭✭✭✭Reggie.


    Gatling wrote: »
    The problem is there tiny compared to Russian holiday makers who drive fancy heavy armour ,

    I'd love to see Poland and the smaller nations from a colilation and send troops to held defend Ukraine

    Now that would be interesting


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Putin is now calling for some sort of statehood in Eastern Ukraine which is pretty much his way of stating mission accomplished.

    Small Russian force moves in, Ukrainians will be reluctant to take them on directly for fear of open war, strength of force is enough to ensure the separatists get supplied and either hold or expand their territory. Defacto state is created. Russians have this down to a tee.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,316 ✭✭✭✭Reggie.


    Five Lamps wrote: »
    Putin is now calling for some sort of statehood in Eastern Ukraine which is pretty much his way of stating mission accomplished.

    Small Russian force moves in, Ukrainians will be reluctant to take them on directly for fear of open war, strength of force is enough to ensure the separatists get supplied and either hold or expand their territory. Defacto state is created. Russians have this down to a tee.

    But what is the bigger picture I wonder. To take Ukraine or just destabilise it


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 687 ✭✭✭Five Lamps


    Reggie. wrote: »
    But what is the bigger picture I wonder. To take Ukraine or just destabilise it

    Who knows? Certainly Eastern Ukraine would be advantageous now that Russia has annexed Crimea. Seems like Russia likes to keep an oar in all these former Soviet republics.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Reggie. wrote: »
    But what is the bigger picture I wonder. To take Ukraine or just destabilise it

    To leave so little of Ukraine that it wont be worth its while joining NATO and EU.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,316 ✭✭✭✭Reggie.


    Morpheus wrote: »
    To leave so little of Ukraine that it wont be worth its while joining NATO and EU.

    Are they that afraid of them joining nato


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Absolutely yes. They are afraid of having a NATO partner cosied up beside the Russian Border and the stolen Crimean peninsula


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,316 ✭✭✭✭Reggie.


    Other nato countries are bordering it in the north


  • Registered Users Posts: 430 ✭✭average hero


    Ukraine would be a far bigger problem for Russia though. The Baltic States are small and some of them have high percentages of ethnic Russians in them. They joined NATO before Russia started flexing its muscles like it's doing now. It seems like Russia is trying to say 'no more'. Ukraine is bigger than the three Baltic states combined and the Black Sea is a warm water port area for Russia.

    Politically it is important for Russia too. Putin is flexing his muscles here and doesn't want to concede Ukraine to NATO in front of home audiences. It may be a factor in the future of Moldova too.


Advertisement