Ukraine 21: On the Attack with a Giant Phallic Spear

[Snowy89]

24 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

FT article on the Battle for Kherson.

In response to the Ukrainian counterattacks, Russian occupiers in Kherson are ramping up the kidnap/extradition of Russian friendly citizens (and presumably, Ukrainian children). 

That would be enormous...  Given the (lack) of current progress reports and the amount of land in Kherson still occupied I must say I find that hard to believe. Somewhat comparable to "Ukraine will fall in 3 days". I guess it could happen if the Kerch bridge destruction virtually ended ammunition supplies.

This blog is by the way quite decent for thinking about Russian political thought and actions with respect to the war. https://slantchev.wordpress.com/
 

[Maithanet]

I agree that sounds like an optimistic timeline.  But a lot depends on the situation on the ground.  Russian ammo and other supplies could be getting very low indeed given how incredibly strained the supply situation is on the west bank of the Dnipro.  I'm sure the Ukrainians and NATO are keeping a close track on things like artillery expenditures and reports from captured/defecting prisoners. 

[Kalbear]

Grain of salt, yadda yadda, but looks like Belarus is going to be doing a small-ish mobilization, quiet-like. Unknown if it'll be just for appeasing Russia or for actual attacking or posturing, but it is a change.

 

 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

8 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said:

Grain of salt, yadda yadda, but looks like Belarus is going to be doing a small-ish mobilization, quiet-like. Unknown if it'll be just for appeasing Russia or for actual attacking or posturing, but it is a change.

 

 

Do we have any idea how loyal the Belarussian army is to Lukashenko?

[Werthead]

23 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Do we have any idea how loyal the Belarussian army is to Lukashenko?

It's a mix. Some of the senior generals are personally loyal, some are not particularly loyal at all but keep quiet and reportedly several of them confronted him in March and told him that they could not guarantee the army's loyalty or the ability of the military to support him if civil unrest broke out again and the army was in Ukraine. I can't imagine their assessment of the situation has improved since then.

Whether those guys are still in place or have been fired or whatever since then is unclear.

[mormont]

At this point I assume that Putin has lost patience with Lukashenko and demanded that he stop stalling and do what he's told. Putin is clearly getting more and more angry and is looking for any new way to put pressure on Ukraine. Giving them another front to defend is on the list.

[Werthead]

20 minutes ago, mormont said:

At this point I assume that Putin has lost patience with Lukashenko and demanded that he stop stalling and do what he's told. Putin is clearly getting more and more angry and is looking for any new way to put pressure on Ukraine. Giving them another front to defend is on the list.

Given how everything else has gone so far, possibly having his closest ally unseated in a coup and Belarus swaps sides would be about right.

[Maithanet]

7 minutes ago, Werthead said:

Given how everything else has gone so far, possibly having his closest ally unseated in a coup and Belarus swaps sides would be about right.

While I'm sure the Ukrainians would prefer that Lukashenko would stay on the sidelines, I am pretty doubtful that the Belarussian army is going to make any sort of meaningful difference in this conflict.  It would means some of the troops currently "resting" on the northern border are actually fighting, and there would be less ammo to go around.  That's bit of additional pressure, but hardly decisive.  And that is basically the best case scenario for Putin/Lukashenko wrt Belarus getting involved.  As Wert said, it's quite possible the army would get crushed, Belarus would revolt against Lukashenko and suddenly Ukraine doesn't need to defend the northern border at all, freeing up tens of thousands of troops for offensives elsewhere. 

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

16 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

While I'm sure the Ukrainians would prefer that Lukashenko would stay on the sidelines, I am pretty doubtful that the Belarussian army is going to make any sort of meaningful difference in this conflict.  It would means some of the troops currently "resting" on the northern border are actually fighting, and there would be less ammo to go around.  That's bit of additional pressure, but hardly decisive.  And that is basically the best case scenario for Putin/Lukashenko wrt Belarus getting involved.  As Wert said, it's quite possible the army would get crushed, Belarus would revolt against Lukashenko and suddenly Ukraine doesn't need to defend the northern border at all, freeing up tens of thousands of troops for offensives elsewhere. 

It also opens up Ukraine to target Belarusian military bases, installations, etc. with all this new NATO equipment. 

[Jace, Extat]

47 minutes ago, Matrim Fox Cauthon said:

It also opens up Ukraine to target Belarusian military bases, installations, etc. with all this new NATO equipment. 

Crushing to morale. Hard to downplay something like that.

[Maithanet]

Lt. General Ben Hodges (retired) on the last perun episode said that he expects Ukraine to recapture all of Ukraine up to the Feb 24 borders by the end of the year, and recapture Crimea by midsummer.  That is a pretty fast timeline.

[Werthead]

7 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Lt. General Ben Hodges (retired) on the last perun episode said that he expects Ukraine to recapture all of Ukraine up to the Feb 24 borders by the end of the year, and recapture Crimea by midsummer.  That is a pretty fast timeline.

I wonder if this is based on the breakout and roll-up theory I've seen people floating. Russia has proven so bad at reinforcing the Donbas that I've seen an idea that the Ukrainians could roll past Severodonetsk and Lysychansk to the north and then swing south, almost rolling up the Russian lines. Because Ukraine now has full fire control over all reinforcing roads in the east of the country, almost out to the border, it's difficult to reinforce those positions, and we already know that reinforcing the line in Kherson is dicey. The units that roll up the Donbas line can head south in a grand sweep straight through Luhansk, Donetsk and into Zaporizhzhia from the rear, in conjunction with the actual Zaporizhzhia offensive that always seems to be rumoured to be about to happen. Then the Russians have to abandon Kherson as they'll be trapped in a vice, assuming they don't have to withdraw from Kherson much sooner because of the existing pressure there.

That does seem incredibly optimistic, but it is rooted in the ability of the Russians to reinforce the front which, if anything, will be massively complicated by adding tens of thousands of untrained conscripts to the line.

[The Anti-Targ]

If Belarus attacked or invaded Ukraine would European countries and US carry out attacks on Belarus? Given such attacks are not being carried out on Russia it would not be third parties directly entering the UKR-RUS war, but rather third party countries making sure no other country enters the UKR-RUS war. That could be how Europe and the US frames any attacks in Belarus, but Russia would likely us any direct military action by a country other than Ukraine as direct escalation against Russia and justification for whatever Russia wants to do in escalating it's actions.

Ukraine's supporters need to do or say something to give Belarus further pause.

[Jace, Extat]

15 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

If Belarus attacked or invaded Ukraine would European countries and US carry out attacks on Belarus? Given such attacks are not being carried out on Russia it would not be third parties directly entering the UKR-RUS war, but rather third party countries making sure no other country enters the UKR-RUS war. That could be how Europe and the US frames any attacks in Belarus, but Russia would likely us any direct military action by a country other than Ukraine as direct escalation against Russia and justification for whatever Russia wants to do in escalating it's actions.

Ukraine's supporters need to do or say something to give Belarus further pause.

They should say "bring it motherfuckers". 

This Belarus business reminds of Romania's half-million bayonets wandering off to doom in 1916. 

If the satellite of Russia is compelled to attack Ukraine, they'll be crushed and then Ukrainian heroes will loot the little despotate of anything worth taking. 

The virtuous cycle of war.  

[The Anti-Targ]

Typo?

34 minutes ago, Firebrand Jace said:

The virtuous cycle of war.

should be "virtue-less"?

Unless one thinks regrettable necessity (of having to repel an invading aggressor) amounts to virtue.

[Jace, Extat]

One does.

[A True Kaniggit]

His eventual defeat is absolutely what Putin deserves for Russian to war. 

[Jace, Extat]

I mean I was being sarcastic by saying Ukraine plundering Belarus would be virtuous...

But I absolutely believe courage to defend oneself and others who are attacked is a virtue. 

I mean that's on-its-face obvious. 

[The Anti-Targ]

Courage to defend others is indeed a virtue, but that does not make a virtue of war, since being courageous in defending others against attack does not automatically mean attacking back. Though I guess I am encroaching on the territory of the morality of war thread.

[A True Kaniggit]

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

Courage to defend others is indeed a virtue, but that does not make a virtue of war, since being courageous in defending others against attack does not automatically mean attacking back. Though I guess I am encroaching on the territory of the morality of war thread.

So it is a matter of scale?

And helping someone defend is not attacking back.