After almost a year of war, we have frozen front lines in the east. No changes. Nothing to celebrate
This was after allied war aid infusion in total value much surpassed last russian annual military budget. And that was before we decided to send tanks.
After almost a year of war and press reports of Ukraina winning and Russia collapsing, we have frozen solid front lines. 20% of country occupied (close to Russian territiorial military objectives)
How come? How possibly can that be?
We are now sending tanks to Ukraina. 31 M1, and 14 Leo. total 45.
To me it raises few questions.
What happened to Ukrainian tanks, in last year, so we need to send them our tanks? (I was under impression from press they were winning)
Is 45 advanced tanks enough to make changes on this extremely long front lines, 2.500 km of front?
To say at least, I have doubts.
I shall try not to respond to your questions in the vein in which they were asked.
Equating NATO assistance value to one year of Russian defense spending is a false comparison. It sounds meaningful which is why critics of the war use it, but the economic reality is that Russia (and the latter years of the Soviet Union) spent decades creating the army that invaded Ukraine a year ago. The primary tank used by Russia is the T72 - I assume you understand why it has that model designation. Yes, it has been modernized, but original investments in design and assembly lines were over decades. The same is true of the Russian Air Force. The more pertinent question might be how, after decades of investment of hundreds of billions of dollars, the Ukrainians still defeated the Russian Army in its effort to seize control of the country, forced their retreat from Kyiv, Karkhiv, and Kherson and have fought them to a standstill in the Donbas. That ongoing defensive stand is after Russia consolidated its surviving striking strength there in an attempt to seize and hold all of that region.
It is equally nonsensical to say Putin has achieved his territorial objectives. The VDV and most of a tank army were essentially destroyed in the attempt to take Kyiv and Kharkiv. If anyone believes that he will be satisfied with what he essentially already had but for the south bank of the Dnieper, they are naïve, delusional, or complicit. Any truce along those lines will simply be a pause while Russia attempts to rebuild its army.
It is instructive to me at least that Russia has been forced to depend to an ever greater extent on the Wagner Group for its assault troops. In turn Wagner has been forced to use the sweepings from Russian prisons to attempt to replace its own unsustainable casualties. Hardly the actions of a modern, well organized, and successful army.
Both sides have suffered serious losses. I again recommend you peruse the Oryx tabulations.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html They represent a third party tracking effort based in Europe and Turkey maintaining a count of equipment losses of both sides. A platform only makes the list if there is photographic evidence of its damage, destruction, or capture. Obviously, actual losses will be much higher, but this service offers a good comparison to the claims of both the Russian and Ukrainian MODs. To date, Oryx lists 8953 Russian platforms destroyed damaged or captured. These range from tanks, to IFVs, to trucks, to aircraft, to naval vessels. 1663 of those were main battle tanks. In the same period, Ukraine has lost 2287 of which 453 were tanks. Not a bad exchange rate, though the losses obviously affect Ukraine disproportionately.
Yes, to conduct a successful breakthrough of Russian defensive lines, Ukraine needs adequate armor, artillery, and training. You are correct that 45 modern tanks are inconsequential. I find it infuriating that we have not done more sooner. Russian troops are struggling in the current winter conditions in Ukraine. They are inadequately supplied and trained for such a combat environment. Two fully NATO equipped mechanized BDEs could rupture the Russian line at any place of Ukraine's choosing. Sadly, neither this administration nor Europe has had the courage to make those armament decisions in a timely manner.
As a result, I suspect that Ukraine will be forced to husband its strength through the winter rather than carry out the winter counter offensive I anticipated a few weeks ago. This is particularly true if Putin orders an attempt to resume offensive operations in the spring. We can thank the machinations of Jake Sullivan, Biden's National Security Advisor, and the absence of a competent Chief Executive for this dithering.
If the Leopard consortium comes through as promised now that Germany has finally acquiesced to the export of their tanks, Ukraine will have around 250 modern MBTs by summer. That will be enough to form the core of two modern mechanized brigades. I am not sure that will be decisive.
Here in West-Europe, no one seriously believes in the victory of the Ukrainians.
Ukraine will be supported until the Russians are fed up and finally go to the negotiating table. We must also restrain ourselves from war rhetoric and if the matter escalates, then good night.
Russia is not Serbia and has the most nuclear weapons in the world.
Putin get out of Crimea and the Donbass only through a third world war.
There has guaranteed nobody desire on it here.
Selensky should finally recognize this reality.
It will take another one, or two years, then both parties should be ready.
Crazy world.
Foxi, I think nuclear weapons are of very limited utility. But if we allow ourselves to be blackmailed once by their threatened use, we will be subject to such blackmail forever.
But to my main point, while it is true that no one will win a strategic nuclear exchange, Russia would clearly lose it. Some portion of the Russian arsenal would indeed get through to Western Europe and the US. Some portion of that would hit where it was aimed and explode as designed. I frankly would be stunned if their nuclear equipped submarines successfully launched a single missile before being destroyed by a lurking Virginia class attack boat. But the damage done to the West would indeed be catastrophic.
However, virtually all the US strike would get through. Those warheads would hit exactly where they were aimed and explode exactly as designed. Whatever the damage done by Russian weapons, Putin knows that Russia, as a country and a culture, would cease to exist. Committing national suicide is not a retaliatory choice whatever the ravings of Russian propagandists over on RT.
This war will indeed end in negotiations. Those negotiations will begin in earnest when Putin - not Zelensky - concludes the war is no longer worth the cost. Increasing the flow of counter offensive capability to Ukraine can only hasten Russia reaching that conclusion.
....not me honest....
