Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

Discussions on other historical eras.
Locked
User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4504
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#406

Post by Aida1 » 15 Aug 2022, 16:25

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 15:00
The Russian goal is to destroy the Ukrainian ground forces with artillery, airstrikes, and missile strikes while inflicting vastly disproportionate human and material losses. The territorial goals are ostentatious and of secondary relation to that. They continue to have very few infantryman and want to continue to fight the war with a small expeditionary force in order to avoid political risk. Examples of this, operationally, can be found in WW2 but nothing this extreme.

The war in Ukraine is a very unique and interesting case study in that regard as no country has attempted to invade another with such a strange force structure.

It's a little like the Allies in Normandy in that respect as they attrited the German army with artillery and airstrikes & limited advances. The Russians expect to "break out" after they attrit them to death.

The technique right now is the similar as the Luhansk Oblast, but larger. In the Luhansk oblast, they spent most of their time shooting them up and making limited advances. Then, after they attrited them sufficiently, they shifted operational reserves into Popasna and broke out. Halted, spent 5 weeks again repeating the same technique and fixed all 1st tier Ukrainian units away from the Eastern side of the salient. Shifted more operational reserves to reduce the salient. Then went after the exposed salient, which lead to the collapse of the Ukrainian forces.

The twin cities of S-K were meant to be another major urban battle but it didn't happen as the Ukrainian formations retreated into the Sivesk-Soledar-Bakmut defense line defense line, which we are are at now. The Russians initiated the artillery offensive against this line last month 7/5-6 and are still shooting everyday, with a short operational pause last month. I anticipate the remainder of this phase to continue well into Sept and possibly Oct. Essentially the Ukrainians have stuffed the Donbass with their army and there are a lot more targets to shoot at than at Luhansk.

Their focus right now is not just at the Donbass though, but improving positions at the Kharkiv axis (they just did so on 8/13) and possible limited movements in the South, which they have been on the strategic defensive for months.
This is nonsense. Russia has shifted to limited territorial objectives after it failed in its first objective. Your narritive only shows how deluded you are by your blind love for Russia.
Russia is not going to obliterate the Ukrainian army with artillery fire only because the Ukraine has now too many weapons systems that can take out Russian artillery. And you do not win with artillery only. Attrition is always a bad costly method. Shows how incompetent the russian army is.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4504
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#407

Post by Aida1 » 15 Aug 2022, 16:27

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 15:14
I have seen Russian analysts are talking about a 'huge' estimated Ukrainian military death toll, literally stuff like 100,000-50,000 plus killed. The Russian MOD's kill claim- which was unexpectedly close to Ukrainian govt' officials claims in the spring/summer- are now much higher than they were before.

I ignore this and keep my personal estimate conservative and minimum, at 200K casualties (33K KIA, 200 killed a day). When we see more Ukrainian retreats and breakdowns of units like in the latter stage of the Luhansk campaign, we will know when the Russians will shift operational reserves.

Day 172. This site plots the Ukrainian military's positions everyday, based on Ukrainian sources:

https://militaryland.net/ukraine/invasi ... 2-summary/

Image

Image
You are clearly a Russian propagandist here who parrots anything Russia claims. 😂😂


Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#408

Post by Gooner1 » 15 Aug 2022, 17:58

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 15:00
The Russian goal is to destroy the Ukrainian ground forces with artillery, airstrikes, and missile strikes while inflicting vastly disproportionate human and material losses.

<>

It's a little like the Allies in Normandy in that respect as they attrited the German army with artillery and airstrikes & limited advances. The Russians expect to "break out" after they attrit them to death.

No, the historical parallel you're groping for is not Normandy but Erich von Falkenhayn's strategy of the German 1916 offensive in France.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#409

Post by Cult Icon » 15 Aug 2022, 17:59

To match the Russians in artillery US/NATO would have to transfer enough pieces to maintain a 2000+ Ukrainian artillery force (guns/mlrs), plus millions of rounds. And also match the Russians in long-range strike assets and air support. This is the strategic scale involved here. Since they won't, it's the Russia show for the foreseeable future.

We know from studying WW2 that in normandy/italy, some casualty analysis brought up figures like 80% from fire support. After this war is over, Ukranian casualty analysis will definitely bring up a much higher percentage, more like 95% plus.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#410

Post by Gooner1 » 15 Aug 2022, 18:04

Good article by a Ukrainian journalist https://kyivindependent.com/national/wh ... uperiority

Western countries must have hundreds if not thousands of M109s in storage.
Might be an idea to start transferring more of them to Ukraine and perhaps dedicate the Gucci 155mm kit, like Caesar and PzH2000, to counter-battery?

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#411

Post by Michael Kenny » 15 Aug 2022, 18:12

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 17:59


We know from studying WW2 that in normandy/italy, some casualty analysis brought up figures like 80% from fire support. After this war is over, Ukranian casualty analysis will definitely bring up a much higher percentage, more like 95% plus.
Source lost but probably a post on AHF:

The cause of wounds suffered by soldiers varied widely depending on specific circumstances. A British Corps reported 42.8% wounds caused by bullets during the El Alamein offensive. However the percentage of battle wounds to british soldiers by weapon 1939-45 overall was:

Mortar, grenade, bomb, shell ...........75%
Bullet, AT mine................................10%
mine & booby trap...........................10%
Blast and crush.................................2%
Chemical..........................................2%
other................................................1%

from J Ellis WWII Databook table 57 p257


The US Army Medical Corps has also done many statistical studies on the causes of wounding and tend to show the same trends you see. The slightly lower incidence of artillery casualties was probably due to US soldiers facing fewer artillery, especially in the Pacific experience, than did the German soldiers as a whole.

The causative agent for wounded in action in World War II was found to be:

Small Arms 32%
Shell Fragments 53%
Mines and Booby Traps 3%
Other 12%

For died of wounds it was:

Small Arms 20%
Shell Fragments 62%
Mines and Booby Traps 4%
Other 14%

Overall, the proportion of total casualties caused by artillery or mortar shell fragments was about 55%.

Data as found in Attrition: Forecasting Battle Casualties and Equipment Losses in Modern War by T.N. Dupuy. The data were taken from Beebe and Debakey Battle Casualties: Incidence, Mortality, and Logistic Consideration which may be taken as the definitive source on the subject.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#412

Post by Cult Icon » 15 Aug 2022, 20:16

On the Ukrainian side, they like to seize villages on the outskirts of this 1000 KM plus frontline and declare it liberated. This raises morale, builds up feelings of hope, and makes headlines. The Russians also counterattack and retake them again, leading to relative stasis in the Northern and Southern theaters where they are on the strategic defensive.

However, for the first 172 days of the war Ukraine had only accomplished one! significant counterstrike. This was at Kharkiv. This counterstrike was coordinated with the Russian breakout operation at Popasna. The Russians weakened the Kharkiv' front, to just 5 combat battalions and transported these forces to the Donbass. Taking advantage of this, the Ukrainians counterattacked and loosened the Russian grip on Kharkiv somewhat. This counterstrike however, faded after a few days.

Ukrainian counterattack activity in recent months has subsided greatly compared to the first 3 months of the war, where they were much more offensively active.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4504
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#413

Post by Aida1 » 15 Aug 2022, 20:44

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 20:16
On the Ukrainian side, they like to seize villages on the outskirts of this 1000 KM plus frontline and declare it liberated. This raises morale, builds up feelings of hope, and makes headlines. The Russians also counterattack and retake them again, leading to relative stasis in the Northern and Southern theaters where they are on the strategic defensive.

However, for the first 172 days of the war Ukraine had only accomplished one! significant counterstrike. This was at Kharkiv. This counterstrike was coordinated with the Russian breakout operation at Popasna. The Russians weakened the Kharkiv' front, to just 5 combat battalions and transported these forces to the Donbass. Taking advantage of this, the Ukrainians counterattacked and loosened the Russian grip on Kharkiv somewhat. This counterstrike however, faded after a few days.

Ukrainian counterattack activity in recent months has subsided greatly compared to the first 3 months of the war, where they were much more offensively active.
As usual the russian biased view.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4504
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#414

Post by Aida1 » 15 Aug 2022, 20:48

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 17:59
To match the Russians in artillery US/NATO would have to transfer enough pieces to maintain a 2000+ Ukrainian artillery force (guns/mlrs), plus millions of rounds. And also match the Russians in long-range strike assets and air support. This is the strategic scale involved here. Since they won't, it's the Russia show for the foreseeable future.

We know from studying WW2 that in normandy/italy, some casualty analysis brought up figures like 80% from fire support. After this war is over, Ukranian casualty analysis will definitely bring up a much higher percentage, more like 95% plus.
Not really. It is sufficient to give the Ukraine the means to take out ammo depots and other high value targets. Russian artillery has been inhibited by taking out many ammo depots. And the ukraine can be given the means to improve counterbattery fire.
As usual you suffer pro Russian bias. 😂😂Russia is not doing well at all.
Last edited by Aida1 on 15 Aug 2022, 20:58, edited 1 time in total.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#415

Post by Michael Kenny » 15 Aug 2022, 20:52

Aida1 wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 20:44


As usual the russian biased view.
Translation:

Any account that is not totally fabricated by The Ukrainian Propaganda Ministry is fake News.
Every Ukrainian account of a single Russian tank being destroyed is a massive victory and proof that The Russians are at the point of complete collapse.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4504
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#416

Post by Aida1 » 15 Aug 2022, 20:54

Michael Kenny wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 20:52
Aida1 wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 20:44


As usual the russian biased view.
Translation:

Any account that is not totally fabricated by The Ukrainian Propaganda Ministry is fake News.
Every Ukrainian account of a single Russian tank being destroyed is a massive victory and proof that The Russians are at the point of complete collapse.
Again the biased prorussian view. Laughable. Pure nonsense.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#417

Post by Michael Kenny » 15 Aug 2022, 21:07

Aida1 wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 20:54

Again the biased prorussian view. Laughable. Pure nonsense.

'Biased prorussian view' = anyone who does not believe the alternate reality of the Ukrainian Press Releases.
Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf has a new job in Kyiv!

Tom Peters
Member
Posts: 1545
Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 22:18
Location: GA

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#418

Post by Tom Peters » 16 Aug 2022, 03:38

Cult Icon wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 15:14
I have seen Russian analysts are talking about a 'huge' estimated Ukrainian military death toll, literally stuff like 100,000-50,000 plus killed. The Russian MOD's kill claim- which was unexpectedly close to Ukrainian govt' officials claims in the spring/summer- are now much higher than they were before.

I ignore this and keep my personal estimate conservative and minimum, at 200K casualties (33K KIA, 200 killed a day). When we see more Ukrainian retreats and breakdowns of units like in the latter stage of the Luhansk campaign, we will know when the Russians will shift operational reserves.
Why would we put much stock in RU MOD announcements ? I wouldnt believe the UKR stats on RU losses either. 33K dead (you are assuming 200 dead during the entire campaign) implies 132K wounded, out of an initial force of 200K or so, or about 80% losses. As the UKR were defending most of the time, this seems rather high.

The DPR admits to ~60% losses of their entire force. This is likely an upper bound for losses for other combatants. You could also scale infantry losses to tank losses, which looks real bad for the RU, but that might be another high bias due to poor initial RU tactics.

Mad Dog

Tom Peters
Member
Posts: 1545
Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 22:18
Location: GA

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#419

Post by Tom Peters » 16 Aug 2022, 03:45

Michael Kenny wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 21:07
Aida1 wrote:
15 Aug 2022, 20:54

Again the biased prorussian view. Laughable. Pure nonsense.

'Biased prorussian view' = anyone who does not believe the alternate reality of the Ukrainian Press Releases.
Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf has a new job in Kyiv!
Both the official RU and UKR sources are suspect.

Mad Dog

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 8251
Joined: 07 May 2002, 20:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Henry Kissinger on Russia and Ukraine

#420

Post by Michael Kenny » 16 Aug 2022, 04:11

Tom Peters wrote:
16 Aug 2022, 03:45


Both the official RU and UKR sources are suspect.

That is a given. No one is promoting Russian claims. The problem is those deluded souls who really really want to believe Ukraine is 'winning' and on the cusp of a great victory. As has been mentioned several times the promotion of the destruction of even a single Russian vehicle and every minor Russian set-back as a great victory is so like the way Nazi Germany did it in their dying days.

Locked

Return to “Other eras”