Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

zomgbratto t1_j1hi2fz wrote

They really wanted Bakhmut so bad that they're willing to throw all their best chips in this gamble. However, unlike Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, this time they're facing fortified positions that has been in place since 2014 and with an Ukrainian military far better equipped than they were in June. Even if they did capture Bakhmut, they will be so drained that by spring, the Ukrainians will steamroll them in the eastern oblasts.

145

UncleBenji t1_j1ifqu8 wrote

Bakhmut isn’t even important but the Wagner’s have made it their job to capture it.

41

Rogermcfarley t1_j1iw8rz wrote

They've levelled the place so they'll just capture a lost city. Complete waste of time and resources for the Russians.

20

UncleBenji t1_j1ix60c wrote

Exactly but Ukraine can’t afford to let them capture it and use that area as a spearhead to push into Ukraine again. As long as the Wagner’s keep throwing bodies at it, Bakhmut will continue to be a blood bath.

25

scummy_shower_stall t1_j1jypq8 wrote

It’s higher ground literally. So yes, it does have strategic value unfortunately.

7

ReneDeGames t1_j1l8kqx wrote

Only in a local sense, most of the value of taking it is the ability to then attack a pair of larger cites deeper within Ukraine, but as you may notice, if you struggling to take a small village, you will have an even harder time taking larger cities, with even worse supply lines.

3

[deleted] t1_j1k4o4x wrote

[deleted]

1

Aurora_Fatalis t1_j1kdn8y wrote

> we aren't fighting with arrows anymore

We are, however, still fighting with javelins.

18

scummy_shower_stall t1_j1k6j04 wrote

True on the arrows, lol! But there have been some very good analyses on why Bakhmut is important, having to do with logistics. I also remember that if Ukraine falls back, it is a pretty sizable loss of territory which would make it that much harder to win back.

2

jpbarber414 t1_j1hl5lm wrote

Do they even have a best chip left?

19