Russia - threadbanned users in OP

@Gatling according to one comment I saw on Twitter, a lot of that equipment is due to be replaced in the near future and perhaps this is a "before you scrap/decommission the following, we have use for them" type of list?

Could the request for Heavy lift aircraft be about getting armour across the Dnipro? Or simply about being able to improve logistics capability?

I read that BBC interview where it sounds like hell for Ukrainian marines over the river. And a lot of reports suggesting man power is an issue. But the Russians they interview from that front shared the exact same sentiment. Both sides suffer here.

Regardless I've noticed a lot of worrying commentary from the Ukrainian side. Should Ukraine at risk of being stretched pause any notions of attacking Russian lines especially in the East? Go into full defensive mode even if this means for the next 4 or 5 year's. Preserve as much man power and equipment as possible even if that means no ground regained. Ensure you can last a long war.

I have to agree with the NATO advice in hindsight. Ukraine should be focusing 100% of their attacking efforts in Kherson. Not over 3 or 4 different areas. Shortening the gap to the sea of Azov is worth 10 time's shortening the gap to Luhansk or taking a settlement in the East.

Their efforts this year gained about 10km at certain points. But they didn't commit most of their Western gear or focus in a single area. Maybe next year if they obtain fighter jets for air superiority and focus 100% of efforts here they could take 20km. Potentially push past Tokmak and really put the Russians under pressure in the south.

What military equipment would a NATO army use if tasked to drive Russian forces out of Ukraine?

There's a day of reckoning coming for those supporting Ukraine, a crossroads.

And a real danger as Biden has pointed out, that NATO inc US forces will be dragged in. Maybe it's inevitable as things stand.

Pretty much this. There is a difference between posting updates of any operational difficulties the AFU might have, and enthusastically hunting out slithers of unsubstaniated data (or even Russian dis-information in some cases) in full throated attempts to support their Pro-Russia position and to seed doubt in the support of Ukraine.

Even if that information becomes actual news later, it is still obvious what these posters who we have christened "Putinbots" are trying to do. That also includes, by the way, posters who lurk on this thread, press like on Putinbot posts and provide single-sentence pro-Russia snippets before disappearing again.

To me the biggest issue now going forward is the lack of any real progress,yes they gained a few km here and there but for most part they haven't managed any significant gains despite the tens of billions in equipment being given to them along with now ignoring the tactical intelligence and planning from the US and NATO,all the while demanding more and more assistance,the Germans are now suggesting one fund of 20 billion for countries to contribute rather than Ukraine asking for donations and fundings separately while other countries are then seeking to be repaid for what they have donated,I get the feeling going forward people will want to see real progress or they may not be willing to keep handing over billions in equipment and money to a non NATO/EU country and they don't have a say in what and when it's used

Alot of people were of the same opinion,how many has the collapse starting been mentioned on here specifically and it's usually the same people say that the Russians have no men ,no artillery,Barrels ,tanks , aircraft and vehicles and yet they have kept the Ukrainians in trenches , only recently the Russians received a number of new Sukhoi aircraft with more to come in the next 12 -18 months, zelensky went to Amsterdam and claimed that the Dutch was handling over 42 F16s which was not agreed on yet it's still be pushed that they are getting 60 + F16s this year but countries like Denmark have said 4/5 aircraft but only if they satisfy the danish requirements on training and logistics first, and then others will follow over a several year period,

If zelensky and the Ukrainian military aren't going to listen to the US and NATO commanders they will slowly lose support for those who have been giving them the most

I liked the idea of a collapse in the defensive lines putin's troops set up in occupied Ukraine but it was not US or NATO troops on the ground and by all accounts there appears to have been much more land mines supported by artillery, drones and aircraft in those defensive lines for a major breakthrough to have been established as many would have hoped. The Ukrainians are the ones who are fighting to free their country from putin's occupation so I give much more value to what they have said about the war over the summer just gone and from sources I have seen they consider that they have made progress. To me it is not so much in territory that they have progressed but in weakening the military forces putin has sent to Ukraine with another update on major progress in destroying putin's military machine across the front lines yesterday.

Each day they are making big strides in depleting the ability of putin's forces to fight and with committed aid to Ukraine from countries with a much greater economic power than putin has, I fail to see how he can believe time is on his side. Free democratic countries will always have debate between politicians but already the EU has committed to more aid for Ukraine than the USA has and this is understandable as to defeat putin will work out to be money well spent for the EU when Europe sees the benefits of peace once again. According to this site the aid promised from the EU now amounts to 77billion euro while the USA has committed to a further 25billion and the EU also outstrips the USA in aid already dispersed. Much talk also of the arms industry in the EU and in Ukraine itself being built up which will have knock on effects on what the armed forces of Ukraine can do to putin's forces.

Again , there is no mention of the severity/ impact of the actions carried out by UKr BEHIND THE LINES - and most of these actions have an intermediate/ long term effect

The US knew and said the counter offensive would fail before it began.

All 50 of them! As it happens I think the bill needed 60 votes to pass so it wasn't even close which ever way Bernie Sanders voted or not because every single Republican voted against it.

On "they could have made advances without air support", I don't know, maybe, but was a big gamble involving a lot of lives, maybe future of their country. It is not how the US/NATO fights (if Ukraine is supposed to be fighting in a "US/NATO" way now, and you accuse it of not doing so). Some kind of air support is on call and lots of long range (cruise) missiles are available. I expect that will be true in any war that US/allies will fight, even if they don't gain full air superiority and aircraft they put up are at a much higher risk than in recent US wars (as they would be in Ukraine, even were the US/NATO itself fighting I think).

Yes, I understand both are losing a lot of men and equipment, with Russia coming off much worse afaik. What Russia are doing here does not seem sustainable for them, but of course Ukraine is a much smaller country and if its backers don't have the will or courage to provide right level of support and then keep it up long enough, it is in trouble. That is what Putin is hoping for. Ukraine might be able to "get by" without getting much more US support (i.e. Ukraine may be capable of holding more or less where it is or Russia may only be able to creep forward with these giant losses, as now) but it will finish possibility of Ukraine regaining lost territory IMO, and that is bad news.

On US/NATO I never agreed with you that they should intervene directly here unless it looked like Ukraine would be overrun after surviving the initial attack. That still seems unlikely to me now no matter what the US does. I agree a handful of F16s from Europeans are not enough. I think many more of those Putin "red lines" + "escalations" should have been breached decisively, and the ones that were finally crossed in the end like providing IFVs, tanks, aircraft, missiles etc. should have been ignored far earlier and in a bigger way. Even to extent of sending "advisers" if numbers of trained people in the background is a blocker for Ukraine getting provided weapons up and running quickly. Anyway, that is the past. What was done (or not done) back then is done.