[GK3]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukrainian-for...19145.html

This article has lots of "good stuff" in it. In particular

As we noted earlier, one of the goals could be to force Russia to pull troops out of the land they occupy in Ukraine.
That’s something our source with direct knowledge of the operations confirmed.
“The goal is to deconcentrate Russian forces,” said the source, adding that there is no planned end to this invasion.
“We will go as far as our logistics take us,” he posited.
Using this incident as a bargaining chip for any sort of peace negotiation, or pressure towards those ends, is also a possibility. The idea that Ukraine has successfully pushed relatively deep into Russian territory with a regular force and has persisted there is clearly a massive propaganda and psychological warfare win.
As for how long this lasts and how such a bold but risky operation will be viewed internally by Ukrainians at a time when the country is struggling to hold the lines within its own borders, time will tell.

References all the previously checked boxes plus adding the "bargaining chip" thought. IMO there is no way in the world Russia will negotiate a peace or even a cease fire with Ukrainians present on Russian soil in "significant" numbers. Politically that would be viewed as admitting defeat. Putin will never do that.

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house. I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

[GK3]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukrainian-for...19145.html

This article has lots of "good stuff" in it. In particular

As we noted earlier, one of the goals could be to force Russia to pull troops out of the land they occupy in Ukraine.
That’s something our source with direct knowledge of the operations confirmed.
“The goal is to deconcentrate Russian forces,” said the source, adding that there is no planned end to this invasion.
“We will go as far as our logistics take us,” he posited.
Using this incident as a bargaining chip for any sort of peace negotiation, or pressure towards those ends, is also a possibility. The idea that Ukraine has successfully pushed relatively deep into Russian territory with a regular force and has persisted there is clearly a massive propaganda and psychological warfare win.
As for how long this lasts and how such a bold but risky operation will be viewed internally by Ukrainians at a time when the country is struggling to hold the lines within its own borders, time will tell.

References all the previously checked boxes plus adding the "bargaining chip" thought. IMO there is no way in the world Russia will negotiate a peace or even a cease fire with Ukrainians present on Russian soil in "significant" numbers. Politically that would be viewed as admitting defeat. Putin will never do that.

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house. I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

[Goose]

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house.

IMO this is much more embarrassing. Smuggling in a bomb and killing one guy is not ideal, but it isn't costing Iran territory or lives. In fact, it is entirely possible some parts of the Iranian government actually wanted this guy out. They couldn't control him. Russia OTOH is losing territory and people.

I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

Totally agree. It might be nice to bring forward some of the old I-HAWK batteries Ukraine has. They can't do much against high altitude-long range threats, but they are deadly against anything else. Russia is going to need lots of "Tac air" in the traditional sense to cut Ukraine's supply lines. Keeping KA-52s off the troops and fighter-bombers away from the GLOCs is necessary, and I-HAWKS can still do that.

You are right that if Ukraine can keep moving Russia can have a very hard time targeting them with artillery. Even if Russia succeeds in finding them moving vehicles don't spend a lot of time in the "kill zone". Lots better than sitting in a trench where Russia knows exactly where you are and you can't move. Unfortunately rapid combined arms advances have a history of coming to a halt because of over-stretched supply lines. I suspect Ukraine doesn't know how to set up a FARP :-).

[Goose]

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house.

IMO this is much more embarrassing. Smuggling in a bomb and killing one guy is not ideal, but it isn't costing Iran territory or lives. In fact, it is entirely possible some parts of the Iranian government actually wanted this guy out. They couldn't control him. Russia OTOH is losing territory and people.

I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

Totally agree. It might be nice to bring forward some of the old I-HAWK batteries Ukraine has. They can't do much against high altitude-long range threats, but they are deadly against anything else. Russia is going to need lots of "Tac air" in the traditional sense to cut Ukraine's supply lines. Keeping KA-52s off the troops and fighter-bombers away from the GLOCs is necessary, and I-HAWKS can still do that.

You are right that if Ukraine can keep moving Russia can have a very hard time targeting them with artillery. Even if Russia succeeds in finding them moving vehicles don't spend a lot of time in the "kill zone". Lots better than sitting in a trench where Russia knows exactly where you are and you can't move. Unfortunately rapid combined arms advances have a history of coming to a halt because of over-stretched supply lines. I suspect Ukraine doesn't know how to set up a FARP :-).

[dabigv13]

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/08/09/u...resources/

An informed and sober Ukrainian viewpoint.

Ukraine has asked as well for permission to use ATACMS to attack airbases from which their troops in Kursk are being attacked. US may feel a bit brushed back they decided to act first before asking.

But the viewpoint in Ukraine is widespread that the US is too scared of Russian escalation/nuclear threats. Perhaps they are trying to demonstrate they are hollow in some way with this brazen attack.

[dabigv13]

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/08/09/u...resources/

An informed and sober Ukrainian viewpoint.

Ukraine has asked as well for permission to use ATACMS to attack airbases from which their troops in Kursk are being attacked. US may feel a bit brushed back they decided to act first before asking.

But the viewpoint in Ukraine is widespread that the US is too scared of Russian escalation/nuclear threats. Perhaps they are trying to demonstrate they are hollow in some way with this brazen attack.

[TrumpCard]

The threat of Russia attacking a NATO country is sort of like the threat that a person faces from COVID. You’re negative, negative, negative, then suddenly positive. It’s not clear what exposure to risk is going to cause the problem until it’s too late.

[TrumpCard]

The threat of Russia attacking a NATO country is sort of like the threat that a person faces from COVID. You’re negative, negative, negative, then suddenly positive. It’s not clear what exposure to risk is going to cause the problem until it’s too late.

[Goose]

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/08/09/u...resources/

An informed and sober Ukrainian viewpoint.

IMO this is a very good article regarding the Ukrainian offensive itself. It touches all the important points, including the gorilla in the room, "How does this end". However, I do think it goes entirely off the rails with this:

This bold incursion into Kursk Oblast highlights the inconsistency of concerns over escalation. Ukraine has been repeatedly prohibited from using ATACMS and similar systems deep within Russian territory due to fears of escalation. Yet now, with Russia’s territorial integrity under direct threat, we do not see nuclear missiles flying toward Berlin, Brussels, Washington, or any other Western city.

The direct threat to Russia is not coming from ATACMS but rather Ukrainian soldiers on Russian soil. Attacking a western city won't change that. At some point Russia might conclude that the military assistance the West is providing to Ukraine is "too much". When and if that happens Russia is not going to nuke Berlin or Washington. They are going to nuke someplace in Ukraine. It may be a "legitimate" military target (like a brigade) or it may actually be a civilian target, like Kiev. Russia is quite aware that any nuclear attack on NATO nations will be met with a nuclear response. At the very least they have to be concerned that it would be met with such a response. Ukraine does not have the capability of such a response, and I can pretty much guarantee you the US will not start a nuclear war with Russia over such an event. The question of how to respond is a very difficult one and nobody, including us and Russia, knows where it would lead. Russia's intent would be to make the statement "Alright, enough is enough. Ukraine has to do what we say or else we will keep doing this". Russia has long regarded tactical nuclear weapons as a "statement" action. It says "If you don't want a full fledged nuclear war, stop resisting". Everybody knows this. The authors undoubtedly know this. Their statement is disingenuous IMO.

[Goose]

https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/08/09/u...resources/

An informed and sober Ukrainian viewpoint.

IMO this is a very good article regarding the Ukrainian offensive itself. It touches all the important points, including the gorilla in the room, "How does this end". However, I do think it goes entirely off the rails with this:

This bold incursion into Kursk Oblast highlights the inconsistency of concerns over escalation. Ukraine has been repeatedly prohibited from using ATACMS and similar systems deep within Russian territory due to fears of escalation. Yet now, with Russia’s territorial integrity under direct threat, we do not see nuclear missiles flying toward Berlin, Brussels, Washington, or any other Western city.

The direct threat to Russia is not coming from ATACMS but rather Ukrainian soldiers on Russian soil. Attacking a western city won't change that. At some point Russia might conclude that the military assistance the West is providing to Ukraine is "too much". When and if that happens Russia is not going to nuke Berlin or Washington. They are going to nuke someplace in Ukraine. It may be a "legitimate" military target (like a brigade) or it may actually be a civilian target, like Kiev. Russia is quite aware that any nuclear attack on NATO nations will be met with a nuclear response. At the very least they have to be concerned that it would be met with such a response. Ukraine does not have the capability of such a response, and I can pretty much guarantee you the US will not start a nuclear war with Russia over such an event. The question of how to respond is a very difficult one and nobody, including us and Russia, knows where it would lead. Russia's intent would be to make the statement "Alright, enough is enough. Ukraine has to do what we say or else we will keep doing this". Russia has long regarded tactical nuclear weapons as a "statement" action. It says "If you don't want a full fledged nuclear war, stop resisting". Everybody knows this. The authors undoubtedly know this. Their statement is disingenuous IMO.

[fullmetal]

As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

May their logistics and supply trains be kept safe and stay swift.

[fullmetal]

As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

May their logistics and supply trains be kept safe and stay swift.

[dabigv13]

Seems we have confirmation now of GMLRS use in Kursk in support of this operation.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/182...1733221659

[dabigv13]

Seems we have confirmation now of GMLRS use in Kursk in support of this operation.

https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/182...1733221659

[TrumpCard]

Some interesting quotes here about an incursion into Russia that's deeper than I've seen reported elsewhere and about support from the West -- especially Germany -- for use of donated weapons inside Russia, including the current incursion in Kursk:

https://www.politico.eu/article/berlin-a...kyy-putin/

[TrumpCard]

Some interesting quotes here about an incursion into Russia that's deeper than I've seen reported elsewhere and about support from the West -- especially Germany -- for use of donated weapons inside Russia, including the current incursion in Kursk:

https://www.politico.eu/article/berlin-a...kyy-putin/

[GK3]

Some interesting quotes here about an incursion into Russia that's deeper than I've seen reported elsewhere and about support from the West -- especially Germany -- for use of donated weapons inside Russia, including the current incursion in Kursk:

https://www.politico.eu/article/berlin-a...kyy-putin/

Based on ISW's map, Ukraine is well beyond 10K into Russia, the 40 K plus or minus looks more likely. New reports say Ukrainian forces have reached positions in Belgorod Oblast, which would make the ISW map out of date. The following report reflects how has used new drone types and tactics to break through the Russian Fortifications and interdict Russian relief columns, to include effective electronic warfare affecting Russian drones and weapons.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambli...nd-drones/
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a...1cf64bd375

[GK3]

Some interesting quotes here about an incursion into Russia that's deeper than I've seen reported elsewhere and about support from the West -- especially Germany -- for use of donated weapons inside Russia, including the current incursion in Kursk:

https://www.politico.eu/article/berlin-a...kyy-putin/

Based on ISW's map, Ukraine is well beyond 10K into Russia, the 40 K plus or minus looks more likely. New reports say Ukrainian forces have reached positions in Belgorod Oblast, which would make the ISW map out of date. The following report reflects how has used new drone types and tactics to break through the Russian Fortifications and interdict Russian relief columns, to include effective electronic warfare affecting Russian drones and weapons.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambli...nd-drones/
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/36a...1cf64bd375

[dabigv13]

Ukraine seems to be expanding and broadening the offensive, with possibly two or three new axes of advance across the border both east and west of the current main axis. Still rumors from Russian telegram channels thus far, no video. 

https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/182...7718868028
https://x.com/DefMon3/status/1822368582841561225
https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1822245964813316469

These locations are along about 100 miles of the border. Obviously unknown how much of this is true and how many Ukrainian units involved, but certainly there's a sense Russian lines may be paper thin.

I'm still skeptical Ukraine can hold this territory, but the wider the penetration the easier the logistics will be, and Russia has only shown the ability to attack by heavily concentrating their infantry and using their glide bombs to repeatedly hammer the defenses for meat assaults. It could take Russia a while to concentrate enough forces to mount a good counter offensive- their ability to counter attack when the lines are unsettled and there is a lot of maneuver has been poor thus far in the war in the limited times that has been the situation. 

Also the large ammo dump at Lipetsk airbase Ukraine recently blew up was reportedly a large stock of FAB glide bombs. Russian precision munitions seem to be used pretty soon after they are produced, so that could be important.

[dabigv13]

Ukraine seems to be expanding and broadening the offensive, with possibly two or three new axes of advance across the border both east and west of the current main axis. Still rumors from Russian telegram channels thus far, no video. 

https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/182...7718868028
https://x.com/DefMon3/status/1822368582841561225
https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1822245964813316469

These locations are along about 100 miles of the border. Obviously unknown how much of this is true and how many Ukrainian units involved, but certainly there's a sense Russian lines may be paper thin.

I'm still skeptical Ukraine can hold this territory, but the wider the penetration the easier the logistics will be, and Russia has only shown the ability to attack by heavily concentrating their infantry and using their glide bombs to repeatedly hammer the defenses for meat assaults. It could take Russia a while to concentrate enough forces to mount a good counter offensive- their ability to counter attack when the lines are unsettled and there is a lot of maneuver has been poor thus far in the war in the limited times that has been the situation. 

Also the large ammo dump at Lipetsk airbase Ukraine recently blew up was reportedly a large stock of FAB glide bombs. Russian precision munitions seem to be used pretty soon after they are produced, so that could be important.

[Goose]

Ukraine seems to be expanding and broadening the offensive, with possibly two or three new axes of advance across the border both east and west of the current main axis. Still rumors from Russian telegram channels thus far, no video. 

https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/182...7718868028
https://x.com/DefMon3/status/1822368582841561225
https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1822245964813316469

These locations are along about 100 miles of the border. Obviously unknown how much of this is true and how many Ukrainian units involved, but certainly there's a sense Russian lines may be paper thin.

Even if most of these supposed attacks are merely "demonstrations" it fixes lots of Russian units in position. They can't be withdrawn (or even "thinned out") if there is a probability of Ukraine attacking said position. If Ukraine does find a position that is "thin enough" for them to get through it that just complicates the reinforcement problems for the Russians. The Ukrainians can cut communications and show up once again where they are not "supposed to be". The most important factor is that the Russian troops closest to the Ukrainian breakthrough are those troops guarding the rest of the border and their "mobile reserve" (if any). If Russia can't use these troops to close the existing breach, Russia will HAVE to move troops from elsewhere, probably the Donbas. This is IMO a major goal of the operation. Moving these troops will take significantly longer, thereby allowing Ukraine more time to fortify/improve their positions in the Kursk Oblast and/or penetrate even deeper into Russia.

I'm still skeptical Ukraine can hold this territory, but the wider the penetration the easier the logistics will be, and Russia has only shown the ability to attack by heavily concentrating their infantry and using their glide bombs to repeatedly hammer the defenses for meat assaults. It could take Russia a while to concentrate enough forces to mount a good counter offensive- their ability to counter attack when the lines are unsettled and there is a lot of maneuver has been poor thus far in the war in the limited times that has been the situation.

IMO absolutely right on in both ideas.

Also the large ammo dump at Lipetsk airbase Ukraine recently blew up was reportedly a large stock of FAB glide bombs. Russian precision munitions seem to be used pretty soon after they are produced, so that could be important.

That is true IMO. Even if Russia has other stocks of bombs, they aren't "local". They will either have to operate from other bases further away or wait until they can move enough to Lipetsk. That makes the damage at Lipetsk a "mission kill" and reduces Russian ability to counter-attack.

[Goose]

Ukraine seems to be expanding and broadening the offensive, with possibly two or three new axes of advance across the border both east and west of the current main axis. Still rumors from Russian telegram channels thus far, no video. 

https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/182...7718868028
https://x.com/DefMon3/status/1822368582841561225
https://x.com/Osinttechnical/status/1822245964813316469

These locations are along about 100 miles of the border. Obviously unknown how much of this is true and how many Ukrainian units involved, but certainly there's a sense Russian lines may be paper thin.

Even if most of these supposed attacks are merely "demonstrations" it fixes lots of Russian units in position. They can't be withdrawn (or even "thinned out") if there is a probability of Ukraine attacking said position. If Ukraine does find a position that is "thin enough" for them to get through it that just complicates the reinforcement problems for the Russians. The Ukrainians can cut communications and show up once again where they are not "supposed to be". The most important factor is that the Russian troops closest to the Ukrainian breakthrough are those troops guarding the rest of the border and their "mobile reserve" (if any). If Russia can't use these troops to close the existing breach, Russia will HAVE to move troops from elsewhere, probably the Donbas. This is IMO a major goal of the operation. Moving these troops will take significantly longer, thereby allowing Ukraine more time to fortify/improve their positions in the Kursk Oblast and/or penetrate even deeper into Russia.

I'm still skeptical Ukraine can hold this territory, but the wider the penetration the easier the logistics will be, and Russia has only shown the ability to attack by heavily concentrating their infantry and using their glide bombs to repeatedly hammer the defenses for meat assaults. It could take Russia a while to concentrate enough forces to mount a good counter offensive- their ability to counter attack when the lines are unsettled and there is a lot of maneuver has been poor thus far in the war in the limited times that has been the situation.

IMO absolutely right on in both ideas.

Also the large ammo dump at Lipetsk airbase Ukraine recently blew up was reportedly a large stock of FAB glide bombs. Russian precision munitions seem to be used pretty soon after they are produced, so that could be important.

That is true IMO. Even if Russia has other stocks of bombs, they aren't "local". They will either have to operate from other bases further away or wait until they can move enough to Lipetsk. That makes the damage at Lipetsk a "mission kill" and reduces Russian ability to counter-attack.

[GK3]

As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

May their logistics and supply trains be kept safe and stay swift.

Amen, ghosts of William T. Sherman and George Patton
I was thinking that they might be able to get enough food locally, but getting adequate fuel and munitions is a serious challenge in this environment.
I wonder how important "seizing and holding terrain is in this operation"?
I do not believe Ukraine wants to carve out a piece of the Russia and try and hold it. What they want is to get the Russian forces moving and then hit them when they are moving. Obviously this can lead to Ukrainian losses, particularly if they get bogged down. I think Ukraine gaines the most by getting the Russian forces moving and trying to stop whatever a particularly Ukrainian force is trying to do. Ukraine wants Russian units out on the road in a line of units, vulnerable to drones and whatever other weapons can reach that location. It might even be a F16. Ukraine can keep its losses and casualties down be staying mobile and letting artillery and drone forces hit the Russian units directlyk then maybe doubleing back and mopping up.

---

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house.

IMO this is much more embarrassing. Smuggling in a bomb and killing one guy is not ideal, but it isn't costing Iran territory or lives. In fact, it is entirely possible some parts of the Iranian government actually wanted this guy out. They couldn't control him. Russia OTOH is losing territory and people.

I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

Totally agree. It might be nice to bring forward some of the old I-HAWK batteries Ukraine has. They can't do much against high altitude-long range threats, but they are deadly against anything else. Russia is going to need lots of "Tac air" in the traditional sense to cut Ukraine's supply lines. Keeping KA-52s off the troops and fighter-bombers away from the GLOCs is necessary, and I-HAWKS can still do that.

You are right that if Ukraine can keep moving Russia can have a very hard time targeting them with artillery. Even if Russia succeeds in finding them moving vehicles don't spend a lot of time in the "kill zone". Lots better than sitting in a trench where Russia knows exactly where you are and you can't move. Unfortunately rapid combined arms advances have a history of coming to a halt because of over-stretched supply lines. I suspect Ukraine doesn't know how to set up a FARP :-).

Exactly right, Ukraine does not want to be tied down to a fixed position conflict. They can't win that kind of conflict. On the other hand if the can force Russian forces to keep moving, it opens them up far more to drone and longer range weapon attacks.  I wonder what William T Shermanand Greorge S. Patton would have done.

[GK3]

As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

May their logistics and supply trains be kept safe and stay swift.

Amen, ghosts of William T. Sherman and George Patton
I was thinking that they might be able to get enough food locally, but getting adequate fuel and munitions is a serious challenge in this environment.
I wonder how important "seizing and holding terrain is in this operation"?
I do not believe Ukraine wants to carve out a piece of the Russia and try and hold it. What they want is to get the Russian forces moving and then hit them when they are moving. Obviously this can lead to Ukrainian losses, particularly if they get bogged down. I think Ukraine gaines the most by getting the Russian forces moving and trying to stop whatever a particularly Ukrainian force is trying to do. Ukraine wants Russian units out on the road in a line of units, vulnerable to drones and whatever other weapons can reach that location. It might even be a F16. Ukraine can keep its losses and casualties down be staying mobile and letting artillery and drone forces hit the Russian units directlyk then maybe doubleing back and mopping up.

---

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house.

IMO this is much more embarrassing. Smuggling in a bomb and killing one guy is not ideal, but it isn't costing Iran territory or lives. In fact, it is entirely possible some parts of the Iranian government actually wanted this guy out. They couldn't control him. Russia OTOH is losing territory and people.

I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

Totally agree. It might be nice to bring forward some of the old I-HAWK batteries Ukraine has. They can't do much against high altitude-long range threats, but they are deadly against anything else. Russia is going to need lots of "Tac air" in the traditional sense to cut Ukraine's supply lines. Keeping KA-52s off the troops and fighter-bombers away from the GLOCs is necessary, and I-HAWKS can still do that.

You are right that if Ukraine can keep moving Russia can have a very hard time targeting them with artillery. Even if Russia succeeds in finding them moving vehicles don't spend a lot of time in the "kill zone". Lots better than sitting in a trench where Russia knows exactly where you are and you can't move. Unfortunately rapid combined arms advances have a history of coming to a halt because of over-stretched supply lines. I suspect Ukraine doesn't know how to set up a FARP :-).

Exactly right, Ukraine does not want to be tied down to a fixed position conflict. They can't win that kind of conflict. On the other hand if the can force Russian forces to keep moving, it opens them up far more to drone and longer range weapon attacks.  I wonder what William T Shermanand Greorge S. Patton would have done.

[dabigv13]

It does seem that with the light of day a lot of the panicked Russian social media chatter was mostly just that.

I think one big difference now with this assault is the involvement of Russian conscript soldiers, who are currently not legally able to be used away from Russian soil. It seems a lot of them seemingly melted on initial contact, which facilitated part of the rapid Ukrainian advance. But this also makes them far more valuable POWs and as a source of internal conflict in Russia; it's one thing for people who signed up for big paychecks to be coming home in boxes or imprisoned. Quite another when they're teenagers who were just doing their national service.

[dabigv13]

It does seem that with the light of day a lot of the panicked Russian social media chatter was mostly just that.

I think one big difference now with this assault is the involvement of Russian conscript soldiers, who are currently not legally able to be used away from Russian soil. It seems a lot of them seemingly melted on initial contact, which facilitated part of the rapid Ukrainian advance. But this also makes them far more valuable POWs and as a source of internal conflict in Russia; it's one thing for people who signed up for big paychecks to be coming home in boxes or imprisoned. Quite another when they're teenagers who were just doing their national service.

[Goose]

It does seem that with the light of day a lot of the panicked Russian social media chatter was mostly just that.

Indeed that seems to be the case. However the panic involved may produce the desired result of fixing Russian units in place. The local population won't take kindly to being "left defenseless" even if the 3 meter tall Ukrainians are not (yet) attacking them :-).

I think one big difference now with this assault is the involvement of Russian conscript soldiers, who are currently not legally able to be used away from Russian soil. It seems a lot of them seemingly melted on initial contact, which facilitated part of the rapid Ukrainian advance. But this also makes them far more valuable POWs and as a source of internal conflict in Russia; it's one thing for people who signed up for big paychecks to be coming home in boxes or imprisoned. Quite another when they're teenagers who were just doing their national service.

The involvement of conscripts will indeed be a new dynamic. However Russia has a long and "glorious" history of mass conscription resulting in high casualties. For many Russians it is a patriotic imperative and "normal". It is not a "big deal". Of course, it helps if the casualties are mostly not ethnic Russians. We shall see. IMO the bigger effect of this incursion, however it ends, is that the Russian government and military failed to protect Russia from a successful attack. That is going to make people mad and create a "search for the guilty". We already see this happening. Just what the Russian army needs, another shakeup at the top! Unfortunately it can also feed the narrative of "See, I told you. Those Ukrainian Fascists are dangerous and coming for us just like the Germans did!". I expect Putin will try that one.

[Goose]

It does seem that with the light of day a lot of the panicked Russian social media chatter was mostly just that.

Indeed that seems to be the case. However the panic involved may produce the desired result of fixing Russian units in place. The local population won't take kindly to being "left defenseless" even if the 3 meter tall Ukrainians are not (yet) attacking them :-).

I think one big difference now with this assault is the involvement of Russian conscript soldiers, who are currently not legally able to be used away from Russian soil. It seems a lot of them seemingly melted on initial contact, which facilitated part of the rapid Ukrainian advance. But this also makes them far more valuable POWs and as a source of internal conflict in Russia; it's one thing for people who signed up for big paychecks to be coming home in boxes or imprisoned. Quite another when they're teenagers who were just doing their national service.

The involvement of conscripts will indeed be a new dynamic. However Russia has a long and "glorious" history of mass conscription resulting in high casualties. For many Russians it is a patriotic imperative and "normal". It is not a "big deal". Of course, it helps if the casualties are mostly not ethnic Russians. We shall see. IMO the bigger effect of this incursion, however it ends, is that the Russian government and military failed to protect Russia from a successful attack. That is going to make people mad and create a "search for the guilty". We already see this happening. Just what the Russian army needs, another shakeup at the top! Unfortunately it can also feed the narrative of "See, I told you. Those Ukrainian Fascists are dangerous and coming for us just like the Germans did!". I expect Putin will try that one.

[GK3]

As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

May their logistics and supply trains be kept safe and stay swift.

Amen, ghosts of William T. Sherman and George Patton
I was thinking that they might be able to get enough food locally, but getting adequate fuel and munitions is a serious challenge in this environment.
I wonder how important "seizing and holding terrain is in this operation"?
I do not believe Ukraine wants to carve out a piece of the Russia and try and hold it.  What they want is to get the Russian forces moving and then hit them when they are moving. Obviously this can lead to Ukrainian losses, particularly if they get bogged down.  I think Ukraine gaines the most by getting the Russian forces moving and trying to stop whatever a particularly Ukrainian force is trying to do.  Ukraine wants Russian units out on the road in a line of units, vulnerable to drones and whatever other weapons can reach that location. It might even be a F16.  Ukraine can keep its losses and casualties down be staying mobile and letting artillery and drone forces hit the Russian units directlyk then maybe doubleing back and mopping up.

---

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house.

IMO this is much more embarrassing. Smuggling in a bomb and killing one guy is not ideal, but it isn't costing Iran territory or lives. In fact, it is entirely possible some parts of the Iranian government actually wanted this guy out. They couldn't control him. Russia OTOH is losing territory and people.

I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

Totally agree. It might be nice to bring forward some of the old I-HAWK batteries Ukraine has. They can't do much against high altitude-long range threats, but they are deadly against anything else. Russia is going to need lots of "Tac air" in the traditional sense to cut Ukraine's supply lines. Keeping KA-52s off the troops and fighter-bombers away from the GLOCs is necessary, and I-HAWKS can still do that.

You are right that if Ukraine can keep moving Russia can have a very hard time targeting them with artillery. Even if Russia succeeds in finding them moving vehicles don't spend a lot of time in the "kill zone". Lots better than sitting in a trench where Russia knows exactly where you are and you can't move. Unfortunately rapid combined arms advances have a history of coming to a halt because of over-stretched supply lines. I suspect Ukraine doesn't know how to set up a FARP :-).

Exactly right, Ukraine does not want to be tied down to a fixed position conflict. They can't win that kind of conflict. On the other hand if the can force Russian forces to keep moving, it opens them up far more to drone and longer range weapon attacks.  I wonder what William T Shermanand Greorge S. Patton would have done.

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

[GK3]

As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

May their logistics and supply trains be kept safe and stay swift.

Amen, ghosts of William T. Sherman and George Patton
I was thinking that they might be able to get enough food locally, but getting adequate fuel and munitions is a serious challenge in this environment.
I wonder how important "seizing and holding terrain is in this operation"?
I do not believe Ukraine wants to carve out a piece of the Russia and try and hold it.  What they want is to get the Russian forces moving and then hit them when they are moving. Obviously this can lead to Ukrainian losses, particularly if they get bogged down.  I think Ukraine gaines the most by getting the Russian forces moving and trying to stop whatever a particularly Ukrainian force is trying to do.  Ukraine wants Russian units out on the road in a line of units, vulnerable to drones and whatever other weapons can reach that location. It might even be a F16.  Ukraine can keep its losses and casualties down be staying mobile and letting artillery and drone forces hit the Russian units directlyk then maybe doubleing back and mopping up.

---

Putin is going to have a hard time admitting this even happened once it is over.  This ranks up with embarrasing events like the Israeli smuggling bombs into an Iranian guest house.

IMO this is much more embarrassing. Smuggling in a bomb and killing one guy is not ideal, but it isn't costing Iran territory or lives. In fact, it is entirely possible some parts of the Iranian government actually wanted this guy out. They couldn't control him. Russia OTOH is losing territory and people.

I hope the Ukrainian forces have a lot of MANPADS so they destroy a few more SU 25's and MI 8's.  As long as they can keep moving, they make artillery less usefull.  If they get stuck they might get hammered.

Totally agree. It might be nice to bring forward some of the old I-HAWK batteries Ukraine has. They can't do much against high altitude-long range threats, but they are deadly against anything else. Russia is going to need lots of "Tac air" in the traditional sense to cut Ukraine's supply lines. Keeping KA-52s off the troops and fighter-bombers away from the GLOCs is necessary, and I-HAWKS can still do that.

You are right that if Ukraine can keep moving Russia can have a very hard time targeting them with artillery. Even if Russia succeeds in finding them moving vehicles don't spend a lot of time in the "kill zone". Lots better than sitting in a trench where Russia knows exactly where you are and you can't move. Unfortunately rapid combined arms advances have a history of coming to a halt because of over-stretched supply lines. I suspect Ukraine doesn't know how to set up a FARP :-).

Exactly right, Ukraine does not want to be tied down to a fixed position conflict. They can't win that kind of conflict. On the other hand if the can force Russian forces to keep moving, it opens them up far more to drone and longer range weapon attacks.  I wonder what William T Shermanand Greorge S. Patton would have done.

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

[Goose]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

[Goose]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

[GK3]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

True, but it was still pretty much a scorched earth march in terms of anyone opposing him.  If the locals left him alone, he left the towns and cities alone but heaven help those who fought him. There were Confederate guerillas who attacked him and in response he burned or destroyed all the crops and forage.

[GK3]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

True, but it was still pretty much a scorched earth march in terms of anyone opposing him.  If the locals left him alone, he left the towns and cities alone but heaven help those who fought him. There were Confederate guerillas who attacked him and in response he burned or destroyed all the crops and forage.

[Goose]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

True, but it was still pretty much a scorched earth march in terms of anyone opposing him.  If the locals left him alone, he left the towns and cities alone but heaven help those who fought him.  There were Confederate guerillas who attacked him and in response he burned or destroyed all the crops and forage.

True. Your earlier point about ammunition and gas is right on. Patton ran out of gas and Sherman was concerned about ammunition. Patton had no solution. Sherman had one, he just had to get there. Ukraine has no Savannah in their invasion of Russia. They also don't have a railroad, secure or otherwise. I don't think Ukraine can afford a Voie Sacrée. We will have to see how it plays out, but it isn't obvious how Ukraine can retain a military position in Russia. Then again, lots of things in this war aren't "obvious".

[Goose]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

True, but it was still pretty much a scorched earth march in terms of anyone opposing him.  If the locals left him alone, he left the towns and cities alone but heaven help those who fought him.  There were Confederate guerillas who attacked him and in response he burned or destroyed all the crops and forage.

True. Your earlier point about ammunition and gas is right on. Patton ran out of gas and Sherman was concerned about ammunition. Patton had no solution. Sherman had one, he just had to get there. Ukraine has no Savannah in their invasion of Russia. They also don't have a railroad, secure or otherwise. I don't think Ukraine can afford a Voie Sacrée. We will have to see how it plays out, but it isn't obvious how Ukraine can retain a military position in Russia. Then again, lots of things in this war aren't "obvious".

[GK3]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

True, but it was still pretty much a scorched earth march in terms of anyone opposing him.  If the locals left him alone, he left the towns and cities alone but heaven help those who fought him.  There were Confederate guerillas who attacked him and in response he burned or destroyed all the crops and forage.

True. Your earlier point about ammunition and gas is right on. Patton ran out of gas and Sherman was concerned about ammunition. Patton had no solution. Sherman had one, he just had to get there. Ukraine has no Savannah in their invasion of Russia. They also don't have a railroad, secure or otherwise. I don't think Ukraine can afford a Voie Sacrée. We will have to see how it plays out, but it isn't obvious how Ukraine can retain a military position in Russia. Then again, lots of things in this war aren't "obvious".

Todays discussion of the Ukrainian situation in ISW really shows how messed up their command and control is. Everytime Ukraine shows up somewhere somewhere unexpected more wheels seem to come of their C2 system. Units are sent into the mess with little or no communication with adjacent units.  There are reports of Ukrainian units from Korenevo in the NW and Belaya to the SE.  As a result Russia seems to be playing Whack-a-Mole.  Russian units involved appear to include FSB, Naval Infantry, Conscripts and bits and pieces of regualar Russian units. Apparently Conscripts are not supposed to be involved since sending draftees home in a body bag will not be popular.
I agree that Ukraine has no intent to seize and try and hold Russian territory, but if the Russian Command and Control continues to be so screwed up, they may not be able to resist trying to hold on.  I would think they would be far better off just to keep showing up where they are not expected and then leave. It seems to me Russia is trying to avoid pulling assets out of the areas where they are applying pressure to Ukraine's lines. This makes sense of course, but the big question is whether their alternative solution works. Ukraine seems now to have a C2 structure far more able to control rapidly moving units and still maintain some sort of cohesion.  Maybe some of our and NATO's philosophy has sunk in.

[GK3]

Sherman would have taken every cow and pig he could find and all the food he could carry, but in those days the only other problem was really ammunition.  Today Ukraine can probably feed its men, but they can't put gas in the tanks or replace expended munitions unless they get lucky and capture a supply dump with the right stuff.  Patton would have done what he did back then, run out of gas and have to sit and then deal with whatever else happened.

Sherman didn't need to take any food on the way to Atlanta. He had a railroad that worked and that he could keep open. Of course the troops took what they wanted, but didn't need to. The railroad also ensured Sherman always had enough ammunition and replacements. Sherman had plenty of railroad troops and rebuilt the line whenever required. Johnston, who initially had a bigger army than Sherman, lacked supplies of all sort, even though it was home country. On the way through Georgia into South Carolina was a different story. Sherman could indeed get all the food his men could want, but he could not get ammunition. Sherman had to reach the coast where he could be supplied with ammunition by the USN. Along the way it was touch and go. Sherman was concerned. He was pretty sure there was no organized force that could stop him before he reached the sea, but he didn't have enough ammunition to fight an extended engagement. Fortunately he didn't have to. He got to Savannah just fine, taking just over a month to do so. After that, he had, worst case a place he could retreat to and be supplied easily.

True, but it was still pretty much a scorched earth march in terms of anyone opposing him.  If the locals left him alone, he left the towns and cities alone but heaven help those who fought him.  There were Confederate guerillas who attacked him and in response he burned or destroyed all the crops and forage.

True. Your earlier point about ammunition and gas is right on. Patton ran out of gas and Sherman was concerned about ammunition. Patton had no solution. Sherman had one, he just had to get there. Ukraine has no Savannah in their invasion of Russia. They also don't have a railroad, secure or otherwise. I don't think Ukraine can afford a Voie Sacrée. We will have to see how it plays out, but it isn't obvious how Ukraine can retain a military position in Russia. Then again, lots of things in this war aren't "obvious".

Todays discussion of the Ukrainian situation in ISW really shows how messed up their command and control is. Everytime Ukraine shows up somewhere somewhere unexpected more wheels seem to come of their C2 system. Units are sent into the mess with little or no communication with adjacent units.  There are reports of Ukrainian units from Korenevo in the NW and Belaya to the SE.  As a result Russia seems to be playing Whack-a-Mole.  Russian units involved appear to include FSB, Naval Infantry, Conscripts and bits and pieces of regualar Russian units. Apparently Conscripts are not supposed to be involved since sending draftees home in a body bag will not be popular.
I agree that Ukraine has no intent to seize and try and hold Russian territory, but if the Russian Command and Control continues to be so screwed up, they may not be able to resist trying to hold on.  I would think they would be far better off just to keep showing up where they are not expected and then leave. It seems to me Russia is trying to avoid pulling assets out of the areas where they are applying pressure to Ukraine's lines. This makes sense of course, but the big question is whether their alternative solution works. Ukraine seems now to have a C2 structure far more able to control rapidly moving units and still maintain some sort of cohesion.  Maybe some of our and NATO's philosophy has sunk in.

[Goose]

Todays discussion of the Ukrainian situation in ISW really shows how messed up their command and control is. Everytime Ukraine shows up somewhere somewhere unexpected more wheels seem to come of their C2 system. Units are sent into the mess with little or no communication with adjacent units.  There are reports of Ukrainian units from Korenevo in the NW and Belaya to the SE.  As a result Russia seems to be playing Whack-a-Mole.  Russian units involved appear to include FSB, Naval Infantry, Conscripts and bits and pieces of regualar Russian units. Apparently Conscripts are not supposed to be involved since sending draftees home in a body bag will not be popular.

Russia has adopted a very "decentralized" organization with lots of relatively small units that do not train with each other and do not report to the same command structure. They then couple that with a very "centralized" C2 structure that forbids these decentralized units from acting without explicit orders. Naval infantry isn't part of the Army. The "FSB" in this context is the "legacy" KGB troops that were relatively lightly armed and whose main claim to fame was obedience and political reliability. They are explicitly and bitterly not part of the Army. Add a bunch of small Army units that were probably training/recovering and who have no common chain of command. Nobody could make this work. If the individual units were well led and motivated, they could do some good despite the lack of overall C2 structure. They generally aren't, since you get sacked if you act without orders.

I agree that Ukraine has no intent to seize and try and hold Russian territory, but if the Russian Command and Control continues to be so screwed up, they may not be able to resist trying to hold on.  I would think they would be far better off just to keep showing up where they are not expected and then leave. It seems to me Russia is trying to avoid pulling assets out of the areas where they are applying pressure to Ukraine's lines. This makes sense of course, but the big question is whether their alternative solution works. Ukraine seems now to have a C2 structure far more able to control rapidly moving units and still maintain some sort of cohesion.  Maybe some of our and NATO's philosophy has sunk in.

Ukraine is using two experienced brigades for this advance. These brigades have had their NATO equipment for quite awhile and are proficient in its use. The brigades know and trust their people. The NCOs tend to be experienced older leaders. The Ukrainians have indeed demonstrated they understand Auftragstaktik.  There aren't enough Ukrainians to rely on each other for flank security. Each unit has to assume it must protect itself all around. Right now, the Ukrainian units can be pretty sure that any Russian formation they encounter can be either defeated or bypassed. That won't be true forever. Ukrainian C2 isn't really being tested yet. Ukraine is in the "exploit" phase where coordination of units isn't all that necessary. I just hope that the Ukrainians are disciplined enough to honor orders to advance so far and no farther without further orders. Equally, they need to ensure the advances remain de-conflicted. It is critical that Ukraine does not overstretch its supply lines or collide with a superior Russian force. Eventually, such a force will exist.

IMO Ukraine's intention was always to seize as much territory as it reasonably could. They then intended to withdraw but make Russia force them to do so. Ukraine will inflict as much damage as possible fighting a defensive battle in Russian villages. Same as in Donbas, except the Russians will be flattening their own towns, not Ukrainian ones. That retrograde operation will require great C2 to retain control of the battle while retreating. Of course, that only works if Ukraine can supply its troops. That remains the overriding question.

I am still absolutely mystified why Russia is not utilizing its air power against this Ukrainian advance. Russia has air superiority at a minimum. No Ukrainian vehicle should be able to move on the roads. Yet they do. Makes no sense at all.

[Goose]

Todays discussion of the Ukrainian situation in ISW really shows how messed up their command and control is. Everytime Ukraine shows up somewhere somewhere unexpected more wheels seem to come of their C2 system. Units are sent into the mess with little or no communication with adjacent units.  There are reports of Ukrainian units from Korenevo in the NW and Belaya to the SE.  As a result Russia seems to be playing Whack-a-Mole.  Russian units involved appear to include FSB, Naval Infantry, Conscripts and bits and pieces of regualar Russian units. Apparently Conscripts are not supposed to be involved since sending draftees home in a body bag will not be popular.

Russia has adopted a very "decentralized" organization with lots of relatively small units that do not train with each other and do not report to the same command structure. They then couple that with a very "centralized" C2 structure that forbids these decentralized units from acting without explicit orders. Naval infantry isn't part of the Army. The "FSB" in this context is the "legacy" KGB troops that were relatively lightly armed and whose main claim to fame was obedience and political reliability. They are explicitly and bitterly not part of the Army. Add a bunch of small Army units that were probably training/recovering and who have no common chain of command. Nobody could make this work. If the individual units were well led and motivated, they could do some good despite the lack of overall C2 structure. They generally aren't, since you get sacked if you act without orders.

I agree that Ukraine has no intent to seize and try and hold Russian territory, but if the Russian Command and Control continues to be so screwed up, they may not be able to resist trying to hold on.  I would think they would be far better off just to keep showing up where they are not expected and then leave. It seems to me Russia is trying to avoid pulling assets out of the areas where they are applying pressure to Ukraine's lines. This makes sense of course, but the big question is whether their alternative solution works. Ukraine seems now to have a C2 structure far more able to control rapidly moving units and still maintain some sort of cohesion.  Maybe some of our and NATO's philosophy has sunk in.

Ukraine is using two experienced brigades for this advance. These brigades have had their NATO equipment for quite awhile and are proficient in its use. The brigades know and trust their people. The NCOs tend to be experienced older leaders. The Ukrainians have indeed demonstrated they understand Auftragstaktik.  There aren't enough Ukrainians to rely on each other for flank security. Each unit has to assume it must protect itself all around. Right now, the Ukrainian units can be pretty sure that any Russian formation they encounter can be either defeated or bypassed. That won't be true forever. Ukrainian C2 isn't really being tested yet. Ukraine is in the "exploit" phase where coordination of units isn't all that necessary. I just hope that the Ukrainians are disciplined enough to honor orders to advance so far and no farther without further orders. Equally, they need to ensure the advances remain de-conflicted. It is critical that Ukraine does not overstretch its supply lines or collide with a superior Russian force. Eventually, such a force will exist.

IMO Ukraine's intention was always to seize as much territory as it reasonably could. They then intended to withdraw but make Russia force them to do so. Ukraine will inflict as much damage as possible fighting a defensive battle in Russian villages. Same as in Donbas, except the Russians will be flattening their own towns, not Ukrainian ones. That retrograde operation will require great C2 to retain control of the battle while retreating. Of course, that only works if Ukraine can supply its troops. That remains the overriding question.

I am still absolutely mystified why Russia is not utilizing its air power against this Ukrainian advance. Russia has air superiority at a minimum. No Ukrainian vehicle should be able to move on the roads. Yet they do. Makes no sense at all.