In keeping with the article on ISW's methodology, here's an interesting snippet from the 6/21 ISW update: "While Budanov did not confirm that the Ukrainian forces previously launched drones over the Kremlin on May 3, US intelligence officials previously assessed that the Ukrainian special military or intelligence units are behind a series of covert actions against Russian targets including the May 3 strike.[19] ISW had previously incorrectly assessed the May 3 attack on the Kremlin may have been a Russian false flag.[20]" Buried deep within the update is this brand new admission based on an assessment that was published in the NYT on 5/24. Classic ISW methodology. Wait to report unfavorable news until it's old news, then bury it in the update.
All the reports I am reading indicates that Russia, instead of sitting in their fortifications, is sending out units to engage the Ukrainian military as it tries to advance in the contested zone IN FRONT OF the first major defensive line. Why would you do that? By all reports, their causalities have been high because of this - wouldn't it make sense to just sit back, maybe skirmish slightly, but otherwise wait for Ukraine to attack your defensive lines and then hit them with overlapping fire?
Totally agree--unless that is, they're back lines are so vulnerable that they're doing everything the can to discourage Ukraine from proceeding, out of desperation. That would actually make Russia's reaction....not as dumb as I previously suggested. Perhaps even logical. (which ought to give anyone who's been watching, pause to think...). (IOW: "...wait...that makes too much sense...")
Worse, the chief combatant in any hot war with Moscow would be America. Indeed, despite the fervent support for Ukraine by the European visitors with whom I spoke—mostly members of national governments and the European Parliament—several admitted that their publics were growing weary of providing material support to Ukraine, which led me to ask: Would their people fight if NATO ended up in a real war with Russia? None said yes. https://www.theamericanconservative.com/russias-friendly-neighbor/
Perhaps they are fighting a gentleman’s war. They agree it line up and fight from sunrise to sunset then stop have a drink together at the pub and go at it again in the morning?
Poster in question pulls a lot of his information from Dailykos, which is a flaming Ukrainian propaganda rag. It's pretty unreasonable to believe Russia are abandoning all their defensive positions to go on the offensive. If they are, it means the have a pretty good backup plan. As an aside, I'm highly skeptical of these comments that are supposedly coming from Prigozhin. His latest comments do not line up with even the most positive Ukrainian assessments and we know Putin critics don't last very long. Something doesn't add up about that situation.
But you do agree with the historical accuracy of the coin flip for England? It's called sarcasm. I thought the coin flip would make that clear, but maybe not.
Ukraine is starting to deal with the KA-52 helicopters. Five downed in five days. Russia loses 5 Ka-52 Alligator attack helicopters in as many days
Well, it looks like we've found a U.S. political candidate for the looney tunes comrades we have on here. RFK, Jr. Not sure what meds he's on, but he could run for president. Or for Head Trustee of the Insane Asylum. Either one. He believes that Russia has acted "in good faith" in its invasion of Ukraine, but the U.S. has not. He is even willing to make up a few things along the way to help his arguments. RFK Jr. says Russia ‘acting in good faith’ in Ukraine invasion, US in part to blame for war Wild, imaginary statement in bold. I just hope RFK, Jr. agrees to medication that keeps his brain completely intact.
Listen jack, i'm reading it multiple places. I haven't read anything about russia ABANDONING positions - I've read multiple places that they are fighting IN FRONT OF their defensive positions. Big difference. This is geolocated shit. PS Dailykos has had some of the best war reporting on the Ukraine war of ANYONE. They are a center-left rag on domestic issues that isn't even worth reading, but their war coverage has been amazing. And they have never hidden from the fact that they are openly cheering for Ukraine. But they have reported on everything good and bad. They compile information from sources all over the world - notably from both Russian and Ukrainian sources.
I would avoid getting your war coverage from a site that is “openly cheering for Ukraine.” The Prigozhin stuff is mega sus. A guy doesn’t last very long if he’s openly trashing Putin. But either way, Ukraine’s counteroffensive is not producing more than negligible results at this stage. As a supporter of Ukraine’s independence, I worry their men are being sent into a slaughter and won’t have anything to show for it. Get back to me once the counteroffensive gains amount to anything. Ukraine has become a stalled effort. At some point, you quit before the entire country is laid in ruin and there’s a Kremlin puppet in charge of the rebuilding effort.
Just about anything is better than a self-described cheerleading site for Ukraine, if you want brutally honest news about the war. Newsweek is decent. Russian military uses China in sourcing banned tech from 59 U.S. firms
Early stages of Ukrainian counteroffensive 'not meeting expectations,' Western officials tell CNN | CNN Politics
Better war coverage sites include any Western source which is not shot through with prior hatred for Russia.
Article mentioning Ukraine used much of their air defenses to protect cites. Front lines are more exposed. Hopefully can make adjustments.
92 - OK I'm no military technician but my thoughts: Defensive "stationary" warfare on todays modern battlefield is heavily dependent on terrain and defensive infrastructure IMO. What do I mean? - If you are situated in Italy, like the Germans were at Monte Casino with mountain ranges and rivers to help with the flanks, sure - sit in your fox hole, trench or rubble pile. Ukraine - Different animal. Flat!!!!!! Not much outside woodlines or perhaps rivers to help. With drone and GPS technology, IMO it's probably much more dangerous to hunker down and wait for some HIMARS to blow you to smithereens or a drone dropping a bomb in your hatch. Geography is not the only equation of course but it can heavily influence battles. If I understand military doctrine, it's much better to ATTACK outside your fortress to throw the enemy off balance instead of just waiting. I think mobility (moving around or in) a defensive peremeter is absolutely necessary in todays conflicts or a HIMARS or 155 is gonna land in your lap. But what do I know? My combat experience revolves around squirrel, rabbits and maybe a deer. LOL (Which by the way I no longer indulge in). Just my 2 cents
