Russia on brink of ... NOPE! Russia INVADES Ukraine!

Page 1276 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 17, 2019
13,246
7,854
136
We see all these lists of RU equipment losses, but nothing about UKR losses. Are they not taking any or just not listing them?
 

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,930
187
106
I’m not sure if you are clear on the definition of an editorial but that is 100% an editorial, and from a guy who is basically the Young Grasshopper of Twitter.

I mean this is the guy who kept lying about how Russia only invaded because Ukraine might join NATO, which is a facially stupid idea.
Sack's was summarizing Simon Shusters Time article, he wasn't adding his own opinions especially in the bullet points that I mentioned. Go read the Time article instead you don't like Sacks. Shuster is/was in Kiev, he was talking to high officials and Zelensky's inner circle of aides. Its not Sack's editorializing that average age of Ukrainian soldiers is 43yrs, US/EU frustration over Ukrainian corruption and people like Shurma still being kept as a close advisor.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,758
54,781
136
Sack's was summarizing Simon Shusters Time article, he wasn't adding his own opinions especially in the bullet points that I mentioned. Go read the Time article instead you don't like Sacks. Shuster is/was in Kiev, he was talking to high officials and Zelensky's inner circle of aides. Its not Sack's editorializing that average age of Ukrainian soldiers is 43yrs, US/EU frustration over Ukrainian corruption and people like Shurma still being kept as a close advisor.
He was summarizing the article and then adding in his own editorial opinion. That’s why the article is labeled as ‘analysis’, which in the news world is another word for ‘opinion’, although usually analysis is reserved for expert opinion and Sacks has no expertise in this matter.

Regardless, I did read the Time article and it doesn’t really say anything we already didn’t know. The war is very hard for Ukraine, unfortunately it really has no choice but to continue as Russia cannot offer it meaningful security guarantees.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,123
45,141
136
Blinken is going to South Korea this week. In light of large scale DPRK deliveries of weapons to Russia it's not a big mystery as to why.

If South Korea's munitions output can be tapped directly along with their deep stocks of stuff they don't need anymore that would be quite helpful.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,540
9,759
136
Usually, adversaries get better at war fighting as the war continues. Russia seems stuck on tried and true means of failure. I suppose I shouldn't expect anything different from a totally corrupt mafia state.
Russia has improved dramatically.
They have not (again) waited for the wet season to funnel half their entire forces down a narrow choke point on the way to Kyiv.
They have actually mobilized and deployed the manpower necessary to hold the line across the entire frontline, as opposed to leaving it wide open.

2023 has seen dramatic improvements to Russia's organizational and fighting capability.
There are even reports that the Russian military has started to use drones against the Ukrainian military, as opposed to exclusively using them to bomb cities.

They ARE getting smarter, you just don't see it because of the sheer deficit of where they started.
That, and you think human life has value. Russia absolutely does not. They will expend their "meat" in anyway they see fit, including to simply run Ukraine out of both men and ammo. Russia will use its sheer size over Ukraine in their attempt to win via attrition. Will it work? Time will tell....
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,913
3,892
136
No, its not an editorial from Sacks, Sacks was writing about the Time article. I've linked to both in my earlier post. I've quoted Sack's article because his bullet point format without any spin was helpful.
The Time article was by Shuster and the info he got was directly from Zelensky's inner circle of aides/officials. Ukraine's war is also going quite badly, you cannot dismiss an average age of 43yrs away or scandal ridden Shurma being kept on as a close advisor as Russian propaganda.

It's Russia's war...er special military operation. Emphasis on special.
 

Roger Wilco

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2017
4,736
7,112
136
Russia has improved dramatically.
They have not (again) waited for the wet season to funnel half their entire forces down a narrow choke point on the way to Kyiv.
They have actually mobilized and deployed the manpower necessary to hold the line across the entire frontline, as opposed to leaving it wide open.

2023 has seen dramatic improvements to Russia's organizational and fighting capability.
There are even reports that the Russian military has started to use drones against the Ukrainian military, as opposed to exclusively using them to bomb cities.

They ARE getting smarter, you just don't see it because of the sheer deficit of where they started.
That, and you think human life has value. Russia absolutely does not. They will expend their "meat" in anyway they see fit, including to simply run Ukraine out of both men and ammo. Russia will use its sheer size over Ukraine in their attempt to win via attrition. Will it work? Time will tell....

I agree that human life is inconsequential to Russia, but they have barely made any territorial gains in 2023 while suffering massive equipment losses that they could never hope to replace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
30,965
46,482
136
Russia has improved dramatically.
They have not (again) waited for the wet season to funnel half their entire forces down a narrow choke point on the way to Kyiv.
They have actually mobilized and deployed the manpower necessary to hold the line across the entire frontline, as opposed to leaving it wide open.

2023 has seen dramatic improvements to Russia's organizational and fighting capability.
There are even reports that the Russian military has started to use drones against the Ukrainian military, as opposed to exclusively using them to bomb cities.

They ARE getting smarter, you just don't see it because of the sheer deficit of where they started.
That, and you think human life has value. Russia absolutely does not. They will expend their "meat" in anyway they see fit, including to simply run Ukraine out of both men and ammo. Russia will use its sheer size over Ukraine in their attempt to win via attrition. Will it work? Time will tell....

Got any dramatic examples?

But yeah, sure, they've adapted, from a lot of pressure, because they had to. Important note: the whole time a large number of mid level idiots were killed or replaced. They've certainly taken a harder line on drinking, though drug use has gone up I hear. The current tactics of abject suicide do not appear to be any smarter or effective than previous Russian tactics. We're talking about people who blow up dams and watch their own people wash away in the aftermath, the guys who think barracks can also double as ammo depots. Russia suddenly giving a shit about their own men, or the Geneva Conventions, that would be dramatic.

Just remember a lot of their changes are either half assed, from China, or both. That jammer people here were just talking about for instance. "Russia's got new EW! Jamming everything!"
While true, adding needed context changes things a bit. Those Pole21s jam the Russian stuff too. Turn it off so people can talk to HQ and here comes the JDAM (and that's what happened last week). Sorry, smart not found. That smacks more of desperation. Which is understandable - they no longer have a numeric artillery advantage and are now quite outclassed and outnumbered when it comes to drones.


And uh, no. Not even close. Russian Lancets have been killing Ukrainian gun crews for almost a year now. Might want to check those sources.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Roger Wilco

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,540
9,759
136
I agree that human life is inconsequential to Russia, but they have barely made any territorial gains in 2023 while suffering massive equipment losses that they could never hope to replace.
Attrition isn't about immediate territorial gains.
Those occur after your opponent can no longer resist due to being depleted.

Yet you argue as if you do not know that.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,540
9,759
136
Got any dramatic examples?
I recall that information being passed around on twitter or reddit. That Russian drones are proving more lethal in the past month or two.
So no, I don't have official reports to that effect.
 

Roger Wilco

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2017
4,736
7,112
136
Attrition isn't about immediate territorial gains.
Those occur after your opponent can no longer resist due to being depleted.

Yet you argue as if you do not know that.

Precisely.

Considering Russia is currently suffering their worst losses in this war, what do you think will happen to Russia’s already dismal offensive capabilities in the future?
 

Meghan54

Lifer
Oct 18, 2009
11,684
5,227
136
Precisely.

Considering Russia is currently suffering their worst losses in this war, what do you think will happen to Russia’s already dismal offensive capabilities in the future?
Why, finally the Russian “good secret” army will show up. Can’t you tell from what the Chicken Littles are crying?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roger Wilco

Young Grasshopper

Golden Member
Nov 9, 2007
1,032
380
136
Precisely.

Considering Russia is currently suffering their worst losses in this war, what do you think will happen to Russia’s already dismal offensive capabilities in the future?

Replace Russia with NATO. They’re the ones who we are reading about in articles about weapon stocks being depleted.


 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,758
54,781
136
Replace Russia with NATO. They’re the ones who we are reading about in articles about weapon stocks being depleted.


NATO had suffered zero losses as they aren’t even in the war. Trust me, if NATO decided to join the war you would know it, as would the Russian solders for the short remainder of their lives.

NATO isn’t an artillery force - too limited for our purposes. We are an air based artillery force.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,540
9,759
136
Precisely.

Considering Russia is currently suffering their worst losses in this war, what do you think will happen to Russia’s already dismal offensive capabilities in the future?
More mobilizations. More meat waves.
At some point Ukraine runs out of cluster shells, right?

The tech advantages we have provided, have a limited ammo / shelf life, right?
 

Roger Wilco

Diamond Member
Mar 20, 2017
4,736
7,112
136
More mobilizations. More meat waves.
At some point Ukraine runs out of cluster shells, right?

The tech advantages we have provided, have a limited ammo / shelf life, right?

Is Russia capable of mobilizing nonexistent equipment?

I thought we already determined that the “meat” is meaningless to Russia.
 

Young Grasshopper

Golden Member
Nov 9, 2007
1,032
380
136
NATO had suffered zero losses as they aren’t even in the war. Trust me, if NATO decided to join the war you would know it, as would the Russian solders for the short remainder of their lives.

NATO isn’t an artillery force - too limited for our purposes. We are an air based artillery force.

NATO lost a 20 year war against an army without a single plane, tank or boat, but we’re supposed to believe they can defeat Russia.

🤡
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Zorba

Pens1566

Lifer
Oct 11, 2005
13,527
10,962
136
Replace Russia with NATO. They’re the ones who we are reading about in articles about weapon stocks being depleted.



That's ok, we'll just force feed you TLAMs for dinner. Well, for about 72hrs that is ...
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,913
3,892
136
NATO lost a 20 year war against an army without a single plane, tank or boat, but we’re supposed to believe they can defeat Russia.

🤡

Lol that's like the French dragging the US for losing in Vietnam.

When is the last war Russia has won outside its own borders?