Submitted by No_Zookeepergame_27 t3_yfovrq in worldnews
totoGalaxias t1_iuhmv5m wrote
Reply to comment by Ehldas in Europe Can’t Rely on US Gas to Plug Growing Shortfall Next Year by No_Zookeepergame_27
Ok, this is my opinion. Probably not very popular. I think Ukraine won't be able to regain much more territory for various reasons. One, the country's economy has shrank by half. Right now the government relay on international interventions to sustain itself.
Then, we had this round of tactical attacks from Russia that destroyed something like 30% of the electrical infrastructure in a matter of a week. This I think shows how Russia has a lot lieu way to up the ante.
Sure, the Ukraine army has made important gains lately, but for how long they can sustain this? I do think the Russian army has wiped out a big chunk of the original army, which was very well trained one by the way. Now you have a situation were Ukraine is both trying to gather more combatants from an shrinking population. Plus, they have to learn to use all the donated equipment and figure out how to incorporate it into their tactics.
​
Then again, I don't know much about warfare and my opinion is based on information that I don't know if it is entirely reliable.
Ehldas t1_iuhor19 wrote
>One, the country's economy has shrank by half. Right now the government relay on international interventions to sustain itself.
That's not actually a major issue, in the medium to long term which is how we look at these things. A vast amount of Ukraine's economic output is currently going to supporting the war effort, and a lot more has been disrupted. Once this has been resolved, however, the expectation is that the people and companies which constituted the economy of Ukraine before the war will remain, that Ukraine will regain control of the critical Donbass region (industry and energy) and that Ukraine will gain accelerated access to EU trade corridors and support. Economically, Ukraine doesn't have a great deal to worry about.
>Then, we had this round of tactical attacks from Russia that destroyed something like 30% of the electrical infrastructure in a matter of a week. This I think shows how Russia has a lot lieu way to up the ante.
Most of the infrastructure is being repaired as fast as it's being damaged. Also, Russia is rapidly running out of room with this tactic. The shootdown rate on the missiles it fired today was 88%, and it simply doesn't have too many more of those salvoes to fire. As Ukraine gains access to more and more anti-air defence, Russia's ability to inflict this sort of damage will drop steadily. That's not to say that it's not a major problem, but it's solvable and it's short term.
>Sure, the Ukraine army has made important gains lately, but for how long they can sustain this?
They can sustain it until something specific occurs to change the fact that Ukraine can make gains. What, in your opinion, is this specific thing?
>I do think the Russian army has wiped out a big chunk of the original army, which was very well trained one by the way.
Why do you think this? The Ukrainian army has been steadily increasing in size as they integrate more and more trained units. They've had tens of thousands of troops trained abroad, and these numbers are only increasing. The quality of weapons which which Ukrainian forces are armed are likewise improving steadily. No-one knows what they Ukrainian casualty numbers are, but Ukraine are demonstrably putting more and more troops in play so their casualties are lower than their recruitment and training rate.
>Then again, I don't know much about warfare
Finally we agree on something.
totoGalaxias t1_iui28mv wrote
I don't see how the economical situation in Ukraine is sustainable. Right now they depend on the support of its allies both to sustain the working of the government as well as the supply of weapons. The hope is that this support outlasts the resiliency of the Russian invasion I suppose.
I honestly don't think that Ukrainians are able to reconstruct as fast as you think, mainly due to the austerity brought up by the conflict itself. And all of this damage happened in just two weeks of this type of attacks. Your assumption is that the Russian army can't keep up with this effort and that Ukraine air defenses have been brought up to a level where they now can handle it. And as far as I understand, all of this damage was inflicted using the less expensive kamikaze drones.
I do think casualties in the Ukrainian army are huge. Training tens of thousands won't be enough to go on the offensive to reclaim all the lost territory. Specially now that the mobilized Russian conscripts start joining the ranks of the occupation. At the start of the war, the Ukraine army was even better equipped then now I believe. Even with all of that the Russian army was able to occupy a big chunk of the country. Ukraine even a functional air force too. Now that is all gone.
So yes, I don't know how in the mid or long term Ukraine can go on an offensive to reclaim the lost territories.
Ehldas t1_iui4hwr wrote
>I don't see how the economical situation in Ukraine is sustainable. Right now they depend on the support of its allies both to sustain the working of the government as well as the supply of weapons.
Er... yes, and that is fully sustainable. Both the EU and the US have guaranteed stable revenue supports of around $3bn per month for all of next year.
>I honestly don't think that Ukrainians are able to reconstruct as fast as you think, mainly due to the austerity brought up by the conflict itself.
The power outages are in general lasting hours or a couple of days at maximum. Roads and rail are literally being repaired the next day.
Major infrastructure like buildings, etc. take a lot longer, obviously, but they're still in the process of being repaired already.
>Your assumption is that the Russian army can't keep up with this effort
That is not my assumption, it's the analysis of the military experts who have good estimates of how many missiles Russia had before the war, and how many they've been seen to fire off. They are running incredibly low on missiles.
>and that Ukraine air defenses have been brought up to a level where they now can handle it.
We've seen the Ukrainian success rate climb steadily in the last few weeks, and there is currently only a single active Iris-T system in the country. That will be joined by 3 more Iris-T and 4 more NASAMS in the next few weeks.
>I do think casualties in the Ukrainian army are huge.
You have repeatedly mentioned this, but have given no supporting evidence.
>Training tens of thousands won't be enough to go on the offensive to reclaim all the lost territory.
They are already on the offensive with the force levels they have now, and successfully reclaiming territory, while training up additional forces and integrating additional modern weaponry. Which is back to my first point : what do you think is going to change to make this stop happening? You didn't have an answer for that.
>Specially now that the mobilized Russian conscripts start joining the ranks of the occupation.
The Russian conscripts are a joke. Seriously. They're untrained, they're barely armed, they have no winter clothes and they're going to die by the tens of thousands. They actively interfere with the military efficiency of units to which they're attached.
>At the start of the war, the Ukraine army was even better equipped then now I believe.
Horseshit. At the start of the war Ukraine was very poorly armed. They were running on older Soviet kit and had much fewer forces. Since then they have steadily shifted to modern NATO weapons as they burn down the last of their Soviet-era ammunition, and they have increased the number of troops in active use. They have limited the speed of recruitment only to the number that they can train and arm, but that's an ongoing process. They had little antitank and antiair capability, and only the same inaccurate artillery and rockets as Russia does.
>Even with all of that the Russian army was able to occupy a big chunk of the country.
They took that territory with a massive attack from four directions, assisted by traitors within Ukraine. Since that time they have steadily been losing territory, and the pace at which they're losing territory is increasing. They have not successfully taken any territory in 3-4 months now, so what they did in February is not relevant.
>So yes, I don't know how in the mid or long term Ukraine can go on an offensive to reclaim the lost territories.
You don't know how Ukraine can do exactly what they're currently doing?
It fits with you being wrong on almost every single point of fact above, however, so I'm not surprised.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments