mp4 is from: "WATCH rare tank battle in Donbass"
https://swentr.site/russia/610468-donbass-tank-battle-video/Previous thread:
>>2100275—————————————————–
Evidence of the influence and origin of neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine
https://archive.ph/44B9Qhttps://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323637https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323658https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323663https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323688https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323729https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323733https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323731https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323735https://archive.ph/x1sRT#1323740—————————————————–
ALWAYS APPROACH SOURCES CRITICALLY
Live maps and updates
DeepStateMap:
https://deepstatemap.liveEvents in Ukraine:
https://eventsinukraine.substack.com/SouthFront:
https://southfront.press/category/all-articles/world/europe/ukraine/Watch Together
📺 News/events:
https://tv.leftypol.org/r/HappeningsviaKlash📺 Hangout/chill:
https://tv.leftypol.org/r/bloodcastWatch By Yourself
>Video Essays / Historical Background📺 • Ukraine: The Avoidable War - Boy Boy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LL4eNy4FCs8📺 • Ukraine's Nazi Problem - The Marxist Project
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yZvWAwU5W4📺 • America, Russia, and Ukraine's Far Right - Gravel Institute
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0pyVJG7_6Q📺 • Crimea vs Taiwan: Who Gets Self-Determination? - BadEmpanada
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1W_UH4fmyj0📺 • The Nature of Putin's Russia and Its Causes (3-Part Series) - 1Dime
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8d6Vzi7zYghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zODWTfMwFGwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zuygh9Mzuo
<Current Happenings 📺 • The Grayzone:
https://www.youtube.com/@thegrayzone7996📺 • DDGeopolitics:
https://www.youtube.com/@DDGeopolitics📺 • Defense Politics Asia:
https://www.youtube.com/@DefensePoliticsAsia📺 • The Duran:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdeMVChrumySxV9N1w0Au-w📺 • The News Atlas:
https://www.youtube.com/c/thenewatlas📺 • Military Summary:
https://www.youtube.com/@militarysummary—————————————————–
Social media
>Twitterhttps://twitter.com/GeromanAThttps://twitter.com/plnewstodayhttps://twitter.com/RALee85https://twitter.com/MarQs__https://twitter.com/KofmanMichaelhttps://twitter.com/IntelCrabhttps://twitter.com/michaelh992https://twitter.com/Suriyakmaps
<Telegramhttps://t.me/milinfolivehttps://t.me/hueviykharkovhttps://t.me/conflictzonehttps://t.me/vorpostehttps://t.me/intelslavahttps://t.me/grey_zonehttps://t.me/AussieCossackhttps://t.me/asbmilhttps://t.me/Slavyangrad🇷🇺🇺🇦
Thread guidelines:
• Please remember to add a spoiler to NSFW and extreme content such as graphic violence and gore.
• Try your best to not derail discussion too much from the main events and relevant places where the war is taken place, as well as other happenings, groups and public figures related to it.
• Meta discussion of the historical, philosophical and ideological background of the war is fine as long as its done in good faith and comradely.
• In the event the meta discussion overstays its welcome, participating users will be referred to take the conversation to the INTERNATIONALISM general thread: >>1944320
• Quality shitposting and original content is encouraged! Spamming glowie memes is low effort.
• this is /isg/ for people who treat geopolitics like shitty map games.
>>2110250whether nato involvement is direct or not by your metrics is irrelevant when it's the only thing propping ukraine up into the third year of the war. Russia is fighting NATO economies and industries wearing Ukraine as a puppet, that's just fact.
(besides your first post said that Russia is fighting Ukraine one on one, lol.)
>picrel is what Russia would be facing exclusively if NATO wasn't involved, ISIS-tier shitconsider dilating
>>2110250is transhumanist some insult that doesn't translate into english properly?
genuinely why are you using it so much, what part of this argument is even remotely related to transhumanism
>>2110386it means you gulp down estrogen for breakfast, which of course is a great thing as radlibs proved
>>2110394no i'm using the word transhumanist, it's more demeaning than tгanny, it shows all varieties of commies are radlib at heart
>>2110100The initial assault didn't stall due to a lack of a second echelon but because lack of traffic control meant they jammed up the roads and ran out of supplies. The attack was then halted to reorganise forces and begin negotiations with the Ukrainians.
If the Russian commanders had been competent at moving forces around in real life and not just on a map sheet they'd have reached the Dneper and been able to create a bulge or even pocket of the Ukrops in the Donbas.
>>2110469Oh sorry, I thought the emphasis was meant to be sarcastic in the "2 more weeks" sense.
>>2110472Yeah, even initially the nato mercenaries tapped out early with comments about how this was totally different than fighting tribals in Afghanistan or whatever.
>>2110473Training seems inconsistent across the board, with reports of people being shipped to the front same day and then "elite nato trained units" getting what seems at most 4-6 months, which Scott Ritter referred to as criminal.
>>2110479>Training seems inconsistent across the boardYeah I was referring to just the units trained by NATO outside Ukraine. This wasn't full NATO training, and even that is considered the bare minimum for soldiers to join a line unit and receive further training.
I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of Ukrainian nationalists turn away from the West due to them realising how false most of its aura of superiority is.
>>2110476I don't think there was Russian intent to push up to the Dnieper.
I see the initial stages of the assault like the Sino-Vietnamese War. The Chinese struck with heavy, albeit clumsy, force, and reached the passes to Hanoi. Then they withdrew to avoid getting embroiled in a brutal guerrilla war, and launched border skirmishes that dragged down the Vietnamese economy.
I think that's the same logic with the Kyiv attack; Russia was never going to capture Kyiv, but they wanted to put it under threat to force favorable negotiations.
They will have to take Donbass, of course, but the objective is a grinding, grueling fight until Ukraine makes like Vietnam, which acknowledged that given the force disparity with China, it had to acknowledge its northern neighbour's needs. The Russian objective's similar, it has to send a message to NATO, and it has to convince Ukraine it has to be neutral or Russia-aligned.
The difference is that the attritional skirmishing and the mass assault phases have been merged; Russia bleeds Ukraine (and NATO) fighting over Donbass.
>>2110459Isn't that kind of explained by the fact the advanced side is spending a lot to attack a side that barely even has infrastructure, actually balances the economics of war in favour of the side that has everything jerry rigged with duct tape anyway? Like if you take Vietnam, it was hugely expensive to send all of that hi-tech (for the era anyway) shit and operate it that far from home that then got unleashed on pretty much nothing other than peasants who become economically active as children anyway and thus (speaking brutally) easy to replace. As soon as the Vietnamese were able to shoot down B-52s with foreign supplied AA on the reg, then it was over for the US, the war was expensive enough fuelling and arming the bombers to attack targets that nowhere near match the value of, without now even losing the bombers and thus requiring replacements.
This no doubt inspired them to hand over the then new stinger missiles to the mujahedeen, which then achieved basically the same effect in making it economically unviable to be losing helicopters regularly in attacks against targets considerably cheaper and easier to replace than said helicopters. This in turn has inspired the era of drone warfare where now the AA weapons are too expensive to be firing at drones that cost a tenth of missiles that previously were economically efficient when used against aircraft that cost ten times more.
>>2110473If NATO actually got directly involved and lost enough professional soldiers and resorted to conscription then that would be the standard of training for western mobiks as well. All of the training professional NATO troops receive is to improve/protect their investments in those willing soldiers with training them to manooover and outsmart untrained troops, in attrition warfare that's not a good investment if you've already lost the people with years of training in a matter of months because they couldn't manooover out of the way of a guided bomb, it doesn't apply as well to people you've snatched off the streets of questionable health and motivation and the front is moving now and not in a couple of years time.
People get trained just to sit in a trench and fire in whatever direction their CO tells them to, because that's the only economically viable way men are expended in attrition (aka real) wars.
>>2110512No. America and the Soviets over spent on counter-insurgencies due to bad strategy and soldiers who weren't up to the task of fighting those conflicts.
The argument also wasn't that a more advanced opponent could be forced to spend more than their opposition, but that economics and production were determinative in war.
Training, morale, and leadership of men all matter. The Soviets knew this even when they were cranking out N T-34s for every Panther.
>>2110529Yes troop quality would go down but even in WWII elite formations like paratroopers got extended training. Regular units were also leavened with long service soldiers and veterans and usually given some months to train together. Even WWI trench-sitters were getting rotated out for RnR and more training.
What is killing the Ukrops is the hand to mouth nature of replacements. Instead of making the politically painful decision to increase conscription ahead of losses they've been just doing enough to hold while hoping the next round of Wunderwaffe/sanctions would break Russia.
>>2110531>Training, morale, and leadership of men all matter>>2110534>WWII elite formations like paratroopers got extended trainingThese skills cost quite a bit to teach in soldiers, hence why "elities" receive the training and operate separately for more specific tasks than
>Objective one: retain current clay>Objective two: claim new clayWhile field experienced soldiers are trained as they've got the acumen to survive up until that point, and then they're assigned as NCOs to a squad of not-so-trained troops in the hopes that cheaper investment in a sergeant also compensates for the expediency of getting those troops to the front quickly.
>What is killing the Ukrops is the hand to mouth nature of replacements.Indeed, but technically speaking every one of them will have a gun and do pose a threat on the battlefield who will need to be attacked anyway, it's not as though Russia can just choose
not to bomb them on the basis that they probably wouldn't be very good in a more dynamic combat situation, because they're still sitting in a trench and firing at advancing Russian troops which is difficult to overcome even with training.
The next round of Wunderwaffe and sanctions no doubt provides hope of
reversing their fortunes, but for desperate defences, nothing beats forcing trained soldiers to risk being shot by an alcoholic, or better yet forcing the use of a missile or bomb to attack someone who cost nothing at all to field.
Also I think another formal round of conscription is being avoided for other reasons than it's politically painful (as if anyone in politics will remain in Ukraine after this)
>Clearly, whatever is left of Ukraine will require gargantuan amounts of labour of decades to rebuild, 18-25s are invaluable to this end and with demographics as poor as Ukraine's, the economic value they represent is pretty extreme to just expend in attrition
>If they're being trained properly to increase their chances of survival, they will probably be sent abroad, where they may go AWOL. This apparently is enough of an issue that NATO is now considering the risk of sending trainers to Ukraine instead.
>Thanks to drones making movements of any kind pretty risky, it's actually kind of working for Ukraine that infantry are spread out, a big conscription drive will inevitably create larger groups of infantry that will be easier targets for bombs, missiles, drones, so piecemeal conscription to maintain a presence that prevents Russian soldiers from advancing without concern, but not big enough to have a single bomb wipe out an entire squad's worth of equipment is quite efficient
Overall though, discussing people as commodities that are either difficult or easy to replace depending on how guaranteed their death is, is why war is awful and a peaceful (i.e a communist) world is desirable because war is just about economics and expending capital.
The angle that war values more the skill, leadership and valiance of individual soldiers, rather than the ratio of what it costs when they die compared to what amount of expenditure they can cause beforehand, is to delude one's self that generals and politicians will value the lives of soldiers over capital in a way they don't when they were civilians employed for wage-labour and thus trick themselves into thinking there's something glorious about war. It isn't, you either die in the service of capital, or rarely, you die in an unwelcome necessity for self-defence because fascists didn't like your socialist project.
>>2110613Shameful strawman.
Ukraine doesn't even have enough troops to rotate units out every few weeks as was the norm in most wars. Even if they couldn't afford to mobilise more men there is a reason most 30+ year olds in WWI/WWII weren't assigned to the infantry.
The Ukrops deployed a deliberate strategy of burning up Homo Sovieticus in the belief that Western aid/sanctions would end the war soon.
>>2110476>but because lack of traffic control meant they jammed up the roads and ran out of suppliesAre you with that stupid column thing again? Lmao, Ukrainians to this day believe that they ever damaged it?
Russian tactic was pushing forward, abandoning broken vehicles on their path, all this kind of thing. They broke through, and that implies a second echelon to guard positions and roads. There was no meaningful second echelon. Road jams is nonsense
Like, imagine slicing Ukrainian defences like knife through butter, and then doing whatever you want in their rear. But you don't have ANYBODY to hold the ground behind you
Come to think of it, this SMO was designed much like an anti-terrorist operation
>>2110684The first elements broke through and captured the outskirts of Kiev but the assault broke down because the roads were jammed and they couldn't move up artillery.
The roads were jammed. We could see it on CCTV and satellite. I don't know how you think there could be all that traffic and no "second echelon". Were they all bread trucks or something?
>>2110691Nobody ever given any explanation. Nafo ran with the story that it was 1000 km long and was bombed to shreds (no photos tho). Satellite imagery isn't real for such events, as we have learned from Bucha forgeries, Oreshnik hitting Yuzhmash and similar incidents
Like, what do you think was in those trucks? I suspect it was humanitarian aid mixed with some troops and ammo. Russia was trying to give out humanitarian aid, and there were hundrends of thousands of people living in occupation, with supply lines disrupted.
Unique IPs: 23