How will the Ukraine war end?

How will the Ukraine war end?

  • Rebels win,Eastern Ukraine goes independent

    Votes: 150 39.9%
  • Putin invades Kiev, NATO doesn't move

    Votes: 118 31.4%
  • Putin invades Kiev, NATO fights Russia

    Votes: 27 7.2%
  • Rebels lose, Ukraine stays united

    Votes: 81 21.5%

  • Total voters
    376
I fancy that similar remark about Afro-American or about representatives of LGBT community would not be tolerated here.
As for the Russians then why not...
Have you indeed worked in Russia? How had you came to the country with such a population (as you describe it)?
As you know, I have worked for very short periods in Russia, and had a neutral impression of Russian people. However, I am afraid that the behaviour of Russia in general, as a nation, in waging this war, and of Russian individuals in targeting civilians with murder and rape has removed any positive thoughts I may have had. What makes it even worse is people like you who pretend to be civilised and educated defending these actions.

I will certainly not be travelling to Russia again in my lifetime, even though I had hoped one day to visit St Petersburg and the Hermitage.
 
As you know, I have worked for very short periods in Russia, and had a neutral impression of Russian people. However, I am afraid that the behaviour of Russia in general, as a nation, in waging this war, and of Russian individuals in targeting civilians with murder and rape has removed any positive thoughts I may have had. What makes it even worse is people like you who pretend to be civilised and educated defending these actions.

I will certainly not be travelling to Russia again in my lifetime, even though I had hoped one day to visit St Petersburg and the Hermitage.
Never say never.
There were no endless wars and this one will end later or sooner. Only God knows how it will end.
 
I fancy that similar remark about Afro-American or about representatives of LGBT community would not be tolerated here.
As for the Russians then why not...
Have you indeed worked in Russia? How had you came to the country with such a population (as you describe it)?
Forum rules would be considered against a post.
Murderous, rapey Russian soldiers may become a stereotype but are putting that into practice (again)
Even one of your fellow Russian posters would boast on here about their rapey war crimes.

A direct allegation to an individual may be libelous
It’s up to the moderators as to what posts are acceptable - and any forum member may report any post


Being banned I continued to post under nick name @Stanislaw However, our friend @Mr_Fingerz immediately recognised my style of posting.
Funny that you are a rule follower, but chose to evade a ban with a sock account
 
It sounds as if the south may become a focus of the war again.
It's a very unusual war. Ukrainian forces have no less than 2 times superiority on the front line in manpower, however, with notable deficit of officers (rank major and lower). At the same time Russian forces have overwhelming superiority in firepower, in artillery systems.
I suspect that I was banned for a month because I made predictions that appeared to be wrong. So taking it into account I dare not to predict future events but from my point of view Donbass is now much more important for Moscow. Still the city of Donetsk (1 mln) is being shelled by Ukrainian forces as it is too close to the front line.
Russian forces use tactics that one could expect. They concentrate artillery fire on specific (abandoned) village or fortified position to such a degree that survived defenders have to flee. Russian (frequently separatist) forces capture abandoned positions. So village by village, town by town falls in Russian (separatist) hands.
There is another tactical scheme. Russian forces try establish seni-encirclement to allow Ukrainian soldiers to flee, though without military hardware. It is claimed that only in Lisichansk 700 tanks, armoured vehicles, artillery systems were abandoned.
Concentration of Russian forces on the Southern front (I believe) now is being used as a potential threat. So Kiev has keep sufficient forces on the South in expense of Donbass front.
 
Funny that you are a rule follower, but chose to evade a ban with a sock account
I was surprised to find that I was not only banned but excluded from the list of registered members. So I thought that the rules are not applicable to me for this reason.
 
(...) Concentration of Russian forces on the Southern front (I believe) now is being used as a potential threat. So Kiev has keep sufficient forces on the South in expense of Donbass front.
According to the press release it sounds more like the other way around where a concentration of Ukrainian forces in the south is being used to either take pressure off the Donbass front, or to prevent an advance on Odessa, or even to try to reverse some of the earlier losses and retake territory. The Russian forces being moved are in response to this.

Given how the south is generally more open and the interior has fewer large cities it will be interesting to see if the war there shows more movement than has been the recent case in the Donbass front.
 
According to the press release it sounds more like the other way around where a concentration of Ukrainian forces in the south is being used to either take pressure off the Donbass front, or to prevent an advance on Odessa, or even to try to reverse some of the earlier losses and retake territory. The Russian forces being moved are in response to this.

Given how the south is generally more open and the interior has fewer large cities it will be interesting to see if the war there shows more movement than has been the recent case in the Donbass front.
You are right. Donbas is highly urbanised region with forests in Lugansk and partially Donetsk regions. By contrast there is steppe on the Southern front, woodless area with only a few big or medium size cities.
I suppose that now Russian forces try to destroy remaining Ukrainian military hardware, artillery systems before possible swift advance on the southern direction.
 
You are right. Donbas is highly urbanised region with forests in Lugansk and partially Donetsk regions. By contrast there is steppe on the Southern front, woodless area with only a few big or medium size cities.
I suppose that now Russian forces try to destroy remaining Ukrainian military hardware, artillery systems before possible swift advance on the southern direction.
It so happens that the CBC published a story this afternoon which addresses this question directly.

There are several CBC Radio interviews in this story. You can listen to them via the web page. I have provided a summary of one of them below(Ukraine's potential counter-punch). The others are probably not worth listening to however.
CBC Radio's The House: Can Ukraine hold on?

The CBC interviewed Phillip Karber, the head of an American think tank and an expert on Russian strategy and warfare tactics. He has provided advice to both the Ukrainian government and to NATO.

He had the following to say (I have summarized it into several bullet points).
  • Russia gave up on taking Kiev. They had some sort of plan, but we don't know what it was. The fight around Kiev was primarily an infantry battle and Ukraine's infantry was better than Russia's.
  • Russia then focused on the east.
  • Russian advances there were slow (1km per day) with heavy losses.
  • Now nearing Slovionsk and Kramatorsk (200 km south of Karkiv). Battle in this area is dominated by artillery.
  • West of Slovionsk and Kramatorsk is flat open steppe like Canada's prairies. Battle here will be dominated by armour. Whoever has the most armour and best armour commanders will win. This will be a game changer. Don't know who will win.
  • Russians are "pretty beat up", but are reconstituting their forces.
  • Every Ukrainian unit is already committed and there are no reserves.
  • Arrival of Polish tanks near Kherson made a big difference.
  • Ukraine have lost 50% of tanks, 70% of IFVs/APCs, 35% of artillery. They are down to being walking infantry.
  • Karber was asked if the West have a strategy to supply equipment to keep Ukraine in the war. He said yes, However, they do not have a plan which will help Ukraine win the war.
  • Lots of equipment has been given to Ukraine, but in the form of odds and ends. Training and maintenance is a "nightmare". Aside from the Polish tanks, they have not received a large shipment of weapons which can replace their losses.
  • Only the US can provide large numbers of weapons of a single type as rest of NATO have already given what they can spare.
  • Ukraine are preparing a counter-offensive in the south, with one objective being to recapture Kherson and relieve pressure on Odessa.
  • They have a 60 per cent chance of success in reaching the Dnieper or in putting enough pressure on the Russians that they have to withdraw across the river.
  • Unless they get a large shipment of high quality Western equipment however (tanks, artillery etc., not just small missiles) they will not be able to recapture the east side of the river.
  • Russia will not initiate the use of nuclear weapons if the war goes against them, as it will not necessarily stop the war and it leaves no further room for escalation.
  • War could end in one of two ways. The first is Ukraine defeat the Russian army and the latter withdraw as they did from the area around Kiev.
  • The second scenario is Russia end up controlling the eastern part of Ukraine. However, this will not be the end of Russia's ambitions and they would look to re-establish some sort of "Russian Empire".

Putting several of those points together, it is an interesting question as to how Ukraine's exceptionally heavy losses in terms of armour will affect their ability to fight on the open steppe.
 
It so happens that the CBC published a story this afternoon which addresses this question directly.

There are several CBC Radio interviews in this story. You can listen to them via the web page. I have provided a summary of one of them below(Ukraine's potential counter-punch). The others are probably not worth listening to however.
CBC Radio's The House: Can Ukraine hold on?

The CBC interviewed Phillip Karber, the head of an American think tank and an expert on Russian strategy and warfare tactics. He has provided advice to both the Ukrainian government and to NATO.

He had the following to say (I have summarized it into several bullet points).
  • Russia gave up on taking Kiev. They had some sort of plan, but we don't know what it was. The fight around Kiev was primarily an infantry battle and Ukraine's infantry was better than Russia's.
  • Russia then focused on the east.
  • Russian advances there were slow (1km per day) with heavy losses.
  • Now nearing Slovionsk and Kramatorsk (200 km south of Karkiv). Battle in this area is dominated by artillery.
  • West of Slovionsk and Kramatorsk is flat open steppe like Canada's prairies. Battle here will be dominated by armour. Whoever has the most armour and best armour commanders will win. This will be a game changer. Don't know who will win.
  • Russians are "pretty beat up", but are reconstituting their forces.
  • Every Ukrainian unit is already committed and there are no reserves.
  • Arrival of Polish tanks near Kherson made a big difference.
  • Ukraine have lost 50% of tanks, 70% of IFVs/APCs, 35% of artillery. They are down to being walking infantry.
  • Karber was asked if the West have a strategy to supply equipment to keep Ukraine in the war. He said yes, However, they do not have a plan which will help Ukraine win the war.
  • Lots of equipment has been given to Ukraine, but in the form of odds and ends. Training and maintenance is a "nightmare". Aside from the Polish tanks, they have not received a large shipment of weapons which can replace their losses.
  • Only the US can provide large numbers of weapons of a single type as rest of NATO have already given what they can spare.
  • Ukraine are preparing a counter-offensive in the south, with one objective being to recapture Kherson and relieve pressure on Odessa.
  • They have a 60 per cent chance of success in reaching the Dnieper or in putting enough pressure on the Russians that they have to withdraw across the river.
  • Unless they get a large shipment of high quality Western equipment however (tanks, artillery etc., not just small missiles) they will not be able to recapture the east side of the river.
  • Russia will not initiate the use of nuclear weapons if the war goes against them, as it will not necessarily stop the war and it leaves no further room for escalation.
  • War could end in one of two ways. The first is Ukraine defeat the Russian army and the latter withdraw as they did from the area around Kiev.
  • The second scenario is Russia end up controlling the eastern part of Ukraine. However, this will not be the end of Russia's ambitions and they would look to re-establish some sort of "Russian Empire".

Putting several of those points together, it is an interesting question as to how Ukraine's exceptionally heavy losses in terms of armour will affect their ability to fight on the open steppe.
Do you not foresee more "armor" being donated as part of foreign aid packages?

It's already happening from Macedonia and Poland and the aid package purse is getting more and more generous in the face of more provocation.
 
Do you not foresee more "armor" being donated as part of foreign aid packages?

It's already happening from Macedonia and Poland and the aid package purse is getting more and more generous in the face of more provocation.
Karber apparently doesn't see enough modern tanks and APCs/IFVs being given to Ukraine to make a difference given Ukraine's exceptionally heavy losses of equipment so far.

North Macedonia apparently only had 2 dozen or so tanks to begin with, so it won't make much of a dent in Ukraine's losses.

The Polish T72s were probably the best of the donated equipment Ukraine has received because Poland has a tank manufacturing industry and has been upgrading and updating their T72s. However, the numbers of these won't go far when it comes to replacing Ukraine's huge losses of equipment so far.
 
The Ukraine war is very complex. It is a part of more wide geopolitical contest between Russia and the West and at the same time contains elements of a civil war. First of all there are separatist armed forces. They are tens thousands fighters and at least from formal point of view they are Ukrainian subjects. Also, Ukraine became independent only 3 decades ago and common past in the Soviet union still matters. There is a lot of officers in Russian armed forces who were born in Ukraine and have relatives there.
So it is not 100% civil war but partially it is.
No complexity at all

Rapist murdering scum russians invaded Ukraine and showing the world the russian can never ever be trusted

Put down at Birth they deserve
 
Karber apparently doesn't see enough modern tanks and APCs/IFVs being given to Ukraine to make a difference given Ukraine's exceptionally heavy losses of equipment so far.

North Macedonia apparently only had 2 dozen or so tanks to begin with, so it won't make much of a dent in Ukraine's losses.

The Polish T72s were probably the best of the donated equipment Ukraine has received because Poland has a tank manufacturing industry and has been upgrading and updating their T72s. However, the numbers of these won't go far when it comes to replacing Ukraine's huge losses of equipment so far.

Huge losses?
 
See above with the bullet points. Ukraine has apparently lost 50 per cent of their tanks, 70 per cent of their APCs and IFVs, and 35 per cent of their artillery. The stuff they are getting from the West isn't enough to make up for that.

Any nice infographics with it on similar to the russian losses tracker?

Maybe a nice daily update with covid Ukrainian casualties?
 
See above with the bullet points. Ukraine has apparently lost 50 per cent of their tanks, 70 per cent of their APCs and IFVs, and 35 per cent of their artillery. The stuff they are getting from the West isn't enough to make up for that.
In other words it's going to be a rerun of the German experience in the same area. Limited forces don't work best in the open, Partisans did more damage in certain areas than the Russian.
 
Last edited:
Any nice infographics with it on similar to the russian losses tracker?

Maybe a nice daily update with covid Ukrainian casualties?
As stated in my post, this was a CBC Radio interview with an American expert on Russian warfare who has been advising the Ukrainian government and NATO on current Russian tactics. You can listen to the interview (about 11 minutes long) at the link I gave above. I provided a summary of what I thought were his main points.

I'm not aware of him providing any sort of regular news to the public, as that isn't my understanding of what he does. He's apparently normally talking to government and military officials.

I got the impression that he's doing the radio interview in order to try to get much larger donations of more up to date heavy equipment (tanks, IFVs/APCs, artillery, etc.) for Ukraine. NATO seems willing to trickle equipment into Ukraine to keep the war going, but not in the quantities and quality required to turn the situation around in time. I don't know if he is working on behalf of the Ukrainian government in this particular aspect, although it's a possibility that I would keep in mind.

Overall he strongly supports Ukraine but doesn't sound very optimistic about their prospects. Primarily the issue is apparently one of staying power. The Ukrainians have thrown everything they have into the war, and there is a limit to how long they can sustain the pressure as a functioning society. There is a lot of will to resist now, but that can't last forever. The Russians on the other hand still have reserves they haven't committed and they are in the process of re-organizing.

He seems to feel that when the Russians reach the area to the west of the Donbass the war may enter a whole new phase where armour will operate much more freely and what happens there may be decisive.

I can't comment on whether he's right or not. However, he seems to have good connections to inside sources in the American and Ukrainian governments and so thought that people would be interested in his perspective.
 
In other words it's going to be a rerun of the German experience in the same area. Limited forces don't work best in the open, Partisans did more damage in certain areas than the Russian.
From what he was saying, as the Ukrainians retreat to the west out of the Donbass urban industrial belt the terrain increasingly favours armoured warfare, and the heavy losses of armour the Ukrainians have suffered may put them at a severe disadvantage unless they can get very large shipments of modern kit from NATO ASAP.

Canada has recently diverted shipments of new production LAV IIIs that were intended for the CAF to Ukraine instead. However, this will be a drop in the bucket compared to what Ukraine need and I'm not aware of other NATO countries shipping their latest and most up to date new production armoured kit to Ukraine.
 
I should add to my previous comments that the interviewee said that the majority of the Ukrainian heavy industry which can build and repair armoured vehicles is in the Donbass and so is no longer in Ukrainian hands. This means that their ability to build and maintain their own equipment is limited.
 

Latest Threads

Top