Only one side is getting better equipment and an increase in properly trained men.
There is no appetite in Ukraine for abandoning their land or their people. Zelenky has no mandate for negotiations.
I'd say it matters to the dead and their families. How this will end is anyone's guess. Maybe Ukraine drive Russia out. Maybe Russia take over all of Ukraine. Maybe there's a settlement borne out-of negotiations. My only desire is to see this war end.
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.
and pigs will be requesting take off clearance if and when that happens. This is total pie in the sky fantasy stuff at the moment and for the foreseeable, unless something radically and I do mean radically changes.
And it's another method that daftly expensive, a quagmire of time, training and money maintenance and far more vulnerable than the various missile weapons AA/AT/AP systems. For a start the F-16 has notoriously delicate landing gear which requires high quality and highly vulnerable runways to operate from. I would still say 11 such systems ae far better than 10 and 1 F-16 and would do more actual damage.
Yes they used Himars with the old m31 rockets to cut of the supplies and then spearheaded trough russian defences forcing them to flee and regroup across the river,in a combined arms operation.
And yes they always use artillery to pave the way for a armoured spearhead,thats one of the key elements,and also why they recived more mobile artillery that can follow the armoured battalions.
After that Ukraine also recived the m30a1 rockets that are ment for open terrain and trenches like in Donbas,and will most likely pave the way for another combined arms operation,in spring.
Of course a stronger position on the battlefield gives you a stronger hand in negotiations. I personally don't think time is on Ukraines side so would think negotiations now would make more sense for them, but who knows maybe they'll push Russia back to its borders before it loses too many more men.
The claim of forced conscription in Transcarpathia was made by the Hungarian online publication PestiSracok.
The article was published 3 or 4 day's ago. Search PestiSracok and you should find it.
I suggest you do your own research. But that's probably a bit much to ask isn't it.
People were saying the same before Kherson and the area around Kharkiv were liberated. That fundamentally alters any framework for negotiation and its why nations fight.
Saying "all wars end in negotiation so let's skip straight to there" is historically obtuse. Most conflicts do (not all) but the outcome of the armed conflict is what drives the negotiation. You can't just skip one step. There is no common ground to negotiate over because Ukraine is not willing to leave its citizens under Russian occupation to be abducted, raped and murdered.
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.
My boss would like a word... I've spent the last hour and a bit listening to this. Really interesting insight into the reality of the situation in Bakhmut.
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.
Russia has just declared it will surrender, pay for all damage and give back all the children and babies. If you don't believe me just do your own research, don't be so lazy.
You're very aware of the difference, so you put the wrong thing in brackets as if it was synonymous? The US are not claiming there are greater than 100k KIA
Also VdL said that there was 100,000 officers killed. Which is self-evidently incorrect.
Guys can we just nip this one in the bud before it gets into the triple digit post count? It's scuttering up the thread. We all know the pattern at this stage.
Then i suggest you come up with proof of your claims or simply leave
Sure, whatever you say.
I don't know the exact figure of Ukraine's losses. I do know they haven't needed to mobilise and extra hundread of thousands like Russia have. I know they have only visually lost 1/3 the armour as Russia have. There's no evidence of Ukrainian troops being used as cannon fodder, no evidence of Ukrainian troops leaving their wounded behind to die. No evidence of railway carts filled with dead servicemen like the Russians packed to the roof in Ukrainian railway carts.
So in light of the above, I could make an educated guess that Russia have lost more troops than Ukraine have.
But you cling to the retracted statement that Ukraine had lost 100k if it makes you cope better.
It doesnt matter if Ukraine have lost 300k soldiers,they are still in the fight and will be untill the Russians leave,its that simple.
And there will be no peace untill they do
Now have you got something else creative to come up with?
It is a proxy war and Zelenskyy himself has said that Ukraine is willing to fight to the last Ukrainian. What exactly is your point?
" Russia get out of Ukraine"
Im not against Russia withdrawing their troops, I'm simply stating that negotiations are the best way to secure some sort of peace. I'm not saying peace has to be under Russian terms, negotiations will likely involve an agreement which neither side are 100% in favour of but manages to satisfy both sides in some fashion.
Corrected, right. Do you actually belive that Ukraine has obly lost 13,000? Don't you think its possible that propaganda might be the reason for that "correction"? Ah, believe what you like.
The "proxy war" and "NATO is prepared to fight until the last Ukrainian" lines are straight from the Kremlin. These lines are being repeated on Russian TV every night.
I wasnt aware I was employed as your or any other personers personal researcher, I thought this was a forum to have a discussion. I have provided more than enough information for people to do their own research, given names, approximate timeliness etc. If you wanna ban me from this thread or the site in general I'm sure I'll somehow learn with the loss.
If Russia aren't willing to do that, negotiations are pointless. Allowing Russia to keep any Ukrainian territory is rewarding them for their crimes and gives Putin and his thugs something they can propagandise as a win for their leadership, something that will ultimately lead to further bloodshed when they try their next attempt at Ukraine (or another of their peaceful neighbours).
The sooner negotiations can begin the better, but as negotiations can't begin until Russia leaves Ukraine, the best way to get there quickly (outside of direct intervention i.e. NATO boots on the ground which would be a *very* high risk move) is to give the Ukrainian defence forces whatever they need to kill every Russian on their land or force them to retreat back to Russia.
Also, as has been pointed out many times already, Russia can't be trusted to stick to any agreements reached in negotiations. This entire conflict is in direct contravention to the Budapest Memorandum which the Russian Federation were principal signatories of.
You use HIMMARs, PZ2000 and similar howitzer systems to pound the enemy positions. UA is getting a substantial amount of these at present these mobile artillery platforms are very effective if used right along with drones
The MBT then provide close support artillery backup and prevent the opposing army from getting there heavy armour and lighter artillery into the fight. The Bradley's and other APV's provide mobility. But you need dry ground as you do not want to be operating along roads which caught the Russians early last year
Collins signed over the six counties to try and get peace for the majority of the country. The majority of Ireland view him as a hero rather than a traitor (rightly or not depends on your position). There is a direct comparison- should Zelensky be willing to sign over parts of Ukraine to Russia? That's a question for those involved to decide. Maybe Russia might withdraw from Donbass if Crimea was handed over to them, who knows. To be honest I dont live in Ukraine, whether Russia gets to keep one bit of land or a other is a decision they will have to make, or have already made and we will see how the consequences of that decision play out. Maybe Ukraine pushes Russia back to its initial borders, maybe Russia takes the whole of Ukraine, we will have to wait and see.
I believe in the truth and I know you are a peddler of lies, you have proven it here.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e050b53be62f0ae2404c620976170938.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c635d680d76ce16e490d61f21d7a1353.svg)
