DISASTER | Russian Armored Assault of Synkivka | Ukrainian Bakhmut Counter-Attack
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 гру 2023
- JOIN this channel on Patreon to get access to perks such as exclusive videos, livestreams and more: / weebunion
PAYPAL DONATIONS:
www.paypal.me/WeebUnion
Thanks for watching! And have a great day! :D
Find me here: linktr.ee/weebunion
Map list:
Suriyakmaps: www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?...
Suriyakmaps map re-designed to myself: www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/vie...
Deepstatemap: deepstatemap.live/
Twitter: / weebunionwar
Telegram: t.me/WeebUnionWar
Disclaimer: If you are sensitive to the topics of this channel or get triggered by the contents of my videos I advice you to not watch my channel and avoid the subject all-together.
Additional info on the synkivka assault:
1. Their entrance is good. Classic column with mine removing vehicle starting it off.
2. When they enter they disperse, creating distance between each other and fire support from the side.
3. They take cover before dismounting infantry.
4. They sucked at turning around which is okay and normal but an issue that they didn't allow the infantry to dismount properly.
Here begins the real issues. They leave the infantry without any support from the armored vehicles.
The infantry are left to fight a BMP by themselves. Their literal worst enemy.
Without the Armored support the infantry were left to die. With armored support they'd likely lose some of the armored vehicles but they could easily expand and solidify their control.
At the very LEAST the armored vehicles should've stayed until the infantry entrenched themselves within the buildings.
There's also the question of lack of artillery support, air support, drone support, for these infantry. Where's the cover fire from ATGM to deal with the BMP? I believe this assault was doomed to fail no matter what the Ukrainians responded with because the Russians didn't commit what was needed to win.
I would like to counter the purpose of Russian armored unit turning back is likely they don’t want to stand in open area given the prevalence of FPV drones and it’s a lot easier to target a large tank compare to one drone for one soldier so having the tank moving back into the distant providing fire support while infantry is now holding a foothold is how I view it but I’m not a battlefield commander so how should I know. I see the armored column as a battlefield taxi not as a spearhead. And after infantry are dismounted, they can start digging in and prepare a new forward position and if needed they can call in fire support where the tank can now act as artillery unit or shoot at Ukr armored unit from a “safer” concealed position rather than stay in the village asking to be shelled with the dismounted infantry and pin by drones. I mean if you look at the video it’s a literal opened field that can easily be spotted and barely any large concealment for armored units
@@benbo4394 The Ukrainians have been using similar tactics in the south and all over. Not saying it's good, but it's not unusual. The lack of artillery, EW and drone support however is fatal.
@@allydeaI believe there are drone support in the area that aren’t visible in addition to recon drone are scouting the drop point, so I believe the Russian expect that the tank will be used as direct fire artillery shooting anything first that move in the village before dropping off the infantry and given how close the column are to the village having artillery fall around on their allies can be view as extremely danger close or that artillery had already hit the area before the drone start recording
@@allydeaalso appreciate you for having a fair and civil argument examining the situation rather than just sh*t talking and all that
@@benbo4394 Yeah, it's bad when you have to start a conversation basically expecting it to turn into a shit show. 😞Cheers!
As a former British soldier who has followed this war in detail, it seems to me that the key element of successful big arrow offensives is a combination of surprise and overwhelming force. Because of drones the element of surprise is always negated, and overwhelming forces are impossible to assemble without being spotted and attacked, thus coordinating multiple units becomes increasingly more complex, and the Russians haven't got the communication and command and Control to do it
Also even if such attacks are successful - the flanks are vulnerable to attacks and the casualty rate becomes too high
Believe it or not the RU is actually casualty averse, their primary objective is destruction of UA *not* territorial control, thus RU is playing TDM and scoring a game via K/D ratio, UA is playing conquest and scoring via territorial reclamation
Former US Soldier here: Agree, I think many were expecting large scale armor waves - a la , Fulda Gap Cold War style, yet accurate artillery and observation make that suicide. This is an awkward mix of small unit action with light armor (that seems to rarely survive) and static line action a la WW1. Weird times for large nations to be in open warfare. I am curious how the tactics develop and what organizational styles and arms/equipment changes develop from this experience.
I think you have right in 100%
100 % correct but if you listen to the media russia is sending endless human waves lmao wich is exactly what ukraine did in their failed offensive
@@Huey290-tk9pba new vehicle needs to be created that's highly mobile, ai controlled, can launch its own drone hunters, and allows for air defense for infantry and tanks. That would negate fpv drones somewhat. Tanks and ifvs may need to have air defenses built into them as well. The rounds wouldn't even need to be large to damage the drones before they hit the tanks. Think how air craft carriers fire rounds at planes. The same thing applies but on land and it would need to be ai controlled.
100% Correct...
With new tech,
*you can not mass forces
*You can not do deep penetration
*You have to play the small battles
*You have to leverage your prepositioned artillery
*You have to fight a battle of attrition
Of course even newer tech can throw a monkey wrench into any plan...
So let's see.
I hope for an end to the conflict,
I don't see an end to the conflict.
In other words: “the situation in Soledar is still difficult”
Ukraine's Synkivka footage is clearly a cut and paste edited job from different time periods. When they show the BMPs pulling back, they are passing things that were not there when they drove in 1 minute before. The fact they are even trying to talk about it, while proving with their own video that at least three waves of Rus were offloaded, is a pretty good indication the Russians are probably still there. And by three waves I mean the successful initial assault shown, the next one(s) that left those BPMs on the route, and then the one you see passing the BMPs going back, which was edited in as if it was from the first assault. So we know for sure the Ukrainian version is complete nonsense.
Cope
@@dymed1366 Edited Ukrainian cope footage. Even the ISW says Ukraine lost this battle and the Russians are still there.
I don't know about cope@@dymed1366 this Is one of main issues of this armed conflict, you can't prove many of claims that were made (by boths sides). because some sources show you 3 months old footage And say Its today. (F.e. ukrainian troops casually walking in Bakhmut. footage made in summer or autumn where still were green trees, And it was released in late december or january if i remember) same goes for proving loses of eqpmnt on both sides of this conflict for example by Oryx (look up one of weebs vids (about 2 months ago i think))
@@OakInch God forbid your side not win at everything. Attacking at Synkivka since July and has moved about 1km since even according to Russian sources.
@@dymed1366Russia is absolutely wrecking Ukraine but he indeed coping
That was obviously video from ukrainian drone. The fact that they cut off the video and posted it just showing the beginning tells a lot about the conclusion.
The conclusion is that the Russian lost control over the area with no gains.
@@WeebUnionWU do u like ... make up shit , just to be relevant ?
@@adrianpopescu1745yes heaven forbid in a fluid battlefield, the Russians who are prob full of fresh recruits don’t achieve victory in every single outing. Get a grip it’s war with thousands of shells flying daily and hundreds of drones in sky
Can you talk about the subject matter at hand, rather than the commentor? It's a simple question. Why did they show the beginning if they won? That's all that was asked. Surely, the middle and end would make for better footage. But go ahead and attack the commentor instead of answering the question.@@anthonytrevino3191
@@WeebUnionWU Actually, the northern part of Synkivka is now under Russian control. I did not follow the situation when this happened, but the fact remains that the Russians achieved what they wanted.
Both sides don‘t have the numbers for large scale offensive operations. This is not WW2. I also think that the russians simply don‘t need to push harder because Ukraine will go bankrupt next year.
For others reading the OP comment, Ukraine was bankrupt of its own financial and other resources including loan reserves within the first year. The bankruptcy that OP is talking about is running out of the western lend lease that has not been renewed.
Meanwhile Russia was still operating off of long held reserves from a decade of budget surplus and had yet to start dipping into loan reserves as of the last time I was updated.
They will not bankrupt ,so many west countries give money and weapons
Russia absolutely has the ability for massive operations.
ATGMs, mines, drones, Manpads and fortifications have made it impossible
true
Ukraine already has forever debt to the western institutions. Amazon, Blackrock etc have for some reason bought up all their land. Seems odd to say but best way out of this for the Ukrainians would be to sign a ceasefire and improve relations with the Russians.
Bruh, infantry have RPG, they can easily knock that BMP out. Vehicles can't stay because if they stayed they can easily be destroyed by FPV drones, artillery or infantry with anti-tank. The risk is just not worth it for a few minutes of fire support. Infantry can also call artillery as fire support themself too as well as they most likely have anti-infantry weapons such as RPO-A or GP-25,...
And that is why the Ukrainian video gets cut off.
@@DarrelX-im2hbbro this offensive failed hard 😂
But where is the plan for those infantry units? They need some support like artillery or air forces or second and third waves. On their own they're mere sitting ducks.
@@DarrelX-im2hbincorrect. 80% of the casualties in this war is due to shrapnel, that makes artillery and mortars the deadliest weapon.
Problem with armored vehicle staying there is because it is within the range of ukrainian artillery, which means they will be destroyed quickly since the fields and the village are just open ground. Ukrainans took a risk of pulling the tank there and it worked, however its unclear what happened to that tank. Russians probably counted on dropping infantry there, so that they quickly gained control of the houses etc and then establish a defensive line. Meanwhile the artillery and aviation would support them if ukraine counter attacks. Likely it failed because ukrainians attack in time to avoid it. Its a war you cant always win. There are alot of positions where russian armor steamrolls the defensive lines. The reasons russians are not going balls to the walls, because they are in no rush. going into a massive attack could increase the loses ten folds. Also keep in mind russia can not be careless, because they always have behind their mind that Nato could intervene directly. So they need to save forces for that too. You also underestimate ukraine. They got hundreds of billions worth of equipment, experienced army and are no slouch. Thats all we know of, pretty sure alot more is delivered behind the scenes. Several experts like col Douglas Mccregor who actually participated in operation dessert storm and is expert in maneuver nato style combined war already said multiple times that this is a very different war. If nato did what they did to iraq they would get obliterated against russians. You are tracked at every corner from drones, space navigation and various other methods. Russia does not want to throw in hundreds of thousands of guys with billions worth equipment to get them wrecked and capture couple of hundred kilometers to impress media. They will methodically grind them down and its been said many times by them already that its their main goal right now. Once Ukraine is battered then they will capture ground easier. Whats the point of risking troops? A defeated army will either capitulate and give you free ground or will be weak enough that you can just steamroll them in matter of weeks. Russia increases their army size every day meaning at some point they will be ready to go for entire Ukraine. RIght now they are 600k which is not sufficient. My guess is atleast milion is needed to start pushing towards Dniepr.
Lastly this is a winter where the weather is a disaster in Donbass. Russia just defeated Ukraines counter offensive, but its not easy to just counter attack. They will probably grind them to the summer and then marginally intensify their counter attacks.
That's too optimistic.
I don't know exact numbers, but I doubt we can have much more troops on the frontline. 600k is probably biggest possible number, any more need to turn economy to a "true" war mode, with everything non-vital getting cuts. And Putin politically is not ready for this. Not because of purely theoretical civilian unrest, but because he is a oligarchy made president (even if now they depend on each other equally), he can't hurt them too much.
Nothing in Ukraine can give him enough gains to bribe them.
This is a typical case of "war that wasn't necessity for both sides, but was necessary for the third party"
Good analysis, there is no Napoleon that can do better here. Thousands of sky eyes scan the front all the time.
@@redaerf2b414 Actually no. War was big necessity. Ukraine in nato would create and enormous front for Russia to face Nato. If you think this is hard, imagine russia would need to prepare for Nato confrontation in Ukraine. It would be a disaster. The war was unavoidable unless Ukraine agreed neutrality. Also oligarchs dont decide shit and putin does not bribe anyone. His authority is far beyond the oligarchs he can in an hour make anyone of them a homeless dog. Russians are behind Putin, because they understand the problem of security. Putin is politically stronger than ever. Just go to Russian frontlines and see what the guys are saying. Every single one of them is behind their supreme commander and outright says we will go till the end. Because they know whats in front of them. In fact if those oligarchs try to fuck with Putin, the army will turn back and crush them. Just look when Wagner turned against Putin, most didnt even side with Prigozin and in fact 99 percent of the front said to Wagner to pull out or else they will have to turn the front on them. Morale of the story the army is behind Putin till the end. Thats why they are fighting. Yeah also on average 1000-1500 people a day volunteer to join the army. Yeah so unmotivated and unrest. Yeah there is unrest, there is worries. There are anger towards the command. But they all realize they are one nation fighting the western hegemon that has primary goal of destroying them. So make no misstake, russians will go all the way.
@@DarrelX-im2hb 1. Why did NATO intervene in Serbia? NATO intervenes whenever it wants.
2. Considering that Ukraine has less than 20 millions population and a large part of that population would be ok with Russian control, I don't think that administrating would be a huge problem.
"Why would Putin conquer whole Ukraine"
To not let NATO there. The reason hasn't changed since the beginning.
Многие из вагих аргументов, являются НАДУМАННЫМИ!!!
НИОЛИН НОРМАЛЬНЫЙ ПРОТИВНИК, не станет торговать, стратегическим товаром, со своим противником, обеспечивая его горючим ядерным топливом и другими товарами, развивающими врага. А российское руководство, это делает. Называя запад врагом, торгует с ним стратегически важным сырьем. Вся эта "Специальная Операция" , с самого начала, имеет крайне подозрительную направленность. К содалению, народы обеих родственных стран, оказались на столько глупыми и доверчивыми, что дали втянуть себя, в настоящую, очень кровопролитную и затратную бойню. Печально...
War is hell and a total mess.
_“The Eastern front is like a house of cards. If the front is broken through at one point all the rest will collapse.”_
- Heinz Guderian
Because of such thoughts they got kicked back all the way to Berlin
Maybe in the past,but now there is multiply defense lines ,drones changed everything here
This is what happened in Stalingrad. There was a stalemate until a surprise Russian offensive broke through Romanian lines and this let to an encirclement that doomed the Germans.
@@peterrisbergs7156
The Nazis were losing more manpower and materiel than the Soviets. Attrition would have defeated them without the encirclement.
@@boggisthecat The Soviets lost a million men in Stalingrad the Germans and Axis allies lost about 300,000 men.
Gerasimov just stated that this is "active defence", not offense. Maybe that answers your question?
It's ridiculous! Russia is going to end up losing the war because of offensive indecisiveness. Russia cannot impose their conditions on Ukraine withough much greater territorial gains.
A column like that is a big commitment for Ukraine.But for Russia that is a company level element,well within its active defense doctrine.When the russians will launch their offensive you will see something different.
And they haven’t launched it in almost two years because…
Large scale offensives are nearly impossible until there are adequate defenses against drones and anti-tank missiles. A large group of armored vehicles is nothing more than a concentrated target. You should know this by now. It's not incompetence by either side. It's drones having an advantage over armored vehicles and there are thousands of drones flying daily.
The incompetence is repeatedly making attacks with columns of armoured vehicles as the Russians are seemly intent on doing it over and over again.
where were the Russian drones?
@@seanp9277 дроны не могут боротся с дронами
@@seanp9277it's a massive frontline with offensives in 21 areas
@@captainhurricane5705 could be incompetence, could be drivers got scared, first I've seen something this stupid from Russia in a while but heh no military has perfect commanders
Actually, the northern part of Synkivka is now under Russian control. From this we can conclude that no one abandoned anyone. Armored vehicles delivered stormtroopers in waves. The Ukrainians like to edit their videos to create the illusion of them being in control of the situation, most likely the first wave of stormtroopers suffered casualties, but in the end the Russians gained the upper hand.
5:14 Of course they watched your video, you’re the best Weeb… Thanks again! 🙏
Why did the tanks leave? Can't you see they are under artillery fire?
Yeah so just leave the guys there, it’s not like they are also under fire from artillery, other armored vehicles and drones.
Not sure when this guy became some kind of war strategist..
BMPs were created to transport and then cover the infantry. Hence, why BMPs have that big gun on the top.
@@mpc7440 Yes in the past ,before drones
@@pocaujmniewdupepocaujmniew5128 definitely not, Russia has some of best artillery this was just either bad planning or cowards in IFVs fleeing
The question of the competence of the Russian command which was raised by Weeb Union, is of critical importance in understanding what is going on. I don't have any answers but I believe the following factors deserve attention.
1. Putin is excessively cautious, to the point that might be considered PATHOLOGICAL for a leader in time of war. This could be why the Russians are not fighting in a more aggressive manner.
2. Gerasimov is probably a military genius, but is he also very timid? Does anyone know about this? If it is true Gerasimov is timid, this would reinforce Putin's caution and cause dysfunction in the army's conduct of operations.
3. It is possible the slow pace of the war is due to geopolitical considerations on the part of the Russian leadership. Putin may be playing for higher stakes than just Ukraine -- he may have calculated that the risk of dragging out the war is a worthwhile gamble because the likely result will be the complete humiliation of the leaders of the collective West with many of these leaders being removed from power by the citizens of their countries. Additional factors are the destruction of the US dollar and improved ties between Russia and the Oil Monarchies of the Middle East. Also, the Europeans will get to live through another winter with insufficient energy supplies.
4. Russia does not want to be faced by a prolonged insurgency once the war ends. The US has made it clear that such an insurgency is key goal. By lengthening the war, Russia forces Ukraine to mobilize more men leading to more dead Ukrainians and fewer potential future insurgents. Also, those who survive may be too tired or too intimidated to want to start fighting again after the war ends.
Bingo! Russia displayed that it can afford to play the long game. Also, modern tech allowed even the weakened military units to have quite an effect on the battlefield and at least significantly delay the enemy. Every treeline, vilage, town, train station, Soviet-era factory, church, mineshaft, etc. can now become tough nut to crack. And this is for all intents and purposes a low intensity war (asside from few periods and points of opportunity).You will not see ww2 like mass assaults, because neither side can afford such short term bloodbath.
Putin is cautious exactly because when playing or trading, your paramount importance that you do not lose/go bankrupt. Then after you ensure that, you can use excess resources to try to gain something😸
I disagree with you: Russia 🇷🇺 should not rush to get more territory. They are fighting a coalition of 40 plus nation. There are NATO soldiers in Ukraine providing inteligience and foreign NATO supported fighters. Technology is playing a critical role. Cheap drones have made tanks and other equipment as siting ducks. Tanks and other vehicles are advancing with fear because they can not hide any more. There is no surprise element is mordern warfare.
Merry Christmas Weeb!!
Merry Christmas!
Perhaps the Russian strategy is to create uniform pressure along the entire front line in anticipation of the first clear markers of critical depletion of Ukrainian forces in situation of cancelling support from EU and USA. This allows the Russians to prevent Ukraine from accumulating reserves and steadily increasing its resources, also it gives an understanding of the state of the front at each point at each moment in time.
After the signs of exhaustion of Ukrainian forces appear, the Russians will choose the direction of attack to which they will direct the previously accumulated resources.
Ok so you think they just threw them in to test the defences...... I think they found out
@@ukchatman4920 well yes it would explain why they pulled all the tanks and bmps out of there
@@ukchatman4920Russia's doctrine relies on pressure.
It is forcing the opponent to play in a WWI style battle even if the opponent doesn't want to play that way, but it also creates the environment where the success of the campaign is determined by the ability to maintain supply rather than the abilities of the generals or military strategists, or the quality of the equipment etc.
Russia can effectively keep this style of warfare going indefinitely.
It is happily trading and it's economy hasn't been disrupted anywhere near the extent you would have expected.
If the West falters in its supply to the Ukraine at some point the entire Ukraine front line will collapse and Russia will be able to take whatever part of Ukraine it wants.
Having a small number of troops effectively abandoned to hold a city is nothing but a day's work to the Russian war machine
And if support is renewed next year ?
@A31415 it wont
Brilliant analysis 👍
For a frontline report, it might be better, if you just tell us what you see instead of reflecting on competence/incompetence of the waring sites. There are already too many armchair generals out there.
Those of us who don't fight in wars shouldn't be passing judgment on those who do and especially should not be calling waring armies incompetent.
Something if find absolutely disgusting is people in you tube comment sections mocking Russian and Ukrianian soldiers . Calling them incompetent or insulting theri bravery for running away or retreating . It's gross for keyboard warriors built like Chris Farley to call a Ukrainian or Russian soldier weak or incompetent or poorly trained or make fun of them when videos show them running back towards a more defensible position.
These are the type who have retreated from even leaving their house at all and they the nerve to say a Ukrainian or Russian soldier is to afraid to fight and think it's funny.
Nostalgia seems to be playing its part in this military operation . Trench warfare and open ground assaults with small arms is back in style . Like a repeat performance of W W 1 tactics .
Nothing like WWI tactics.
This is modern warfare.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Georgia, Dagestan and so on was not
The defender has every advantage when the first to land a hit destroys the enemy. So yes, lots of things have been shown to still work even if the numbers of actual personnel involved in an action have shrunk due to the increased lethality of the Early Information Age battlefield.
3:00 Don't they drive back to pick up more infantry in the rear and advance even further?
@@FishMan1nsk Actually, the northern part of Synkivka is now under Russian control. I did not follow the situation when this happened, but the fact remains that the Russians achieved what they wanted.
@@user-yw9kw3qv6x My words. There is a limit of information you can gather out of those videos as they are approved by the ministry of defence and shows you what they want you to see, we only see pinpointed moments of hours of battles. Also, we don't know about troops in the rear, location of the artilleries, other attacks etc. Moreover, look at the column of the BMPs, can you keep track of all of them, and where the troops of each were unloaded? How much time left until the ukranian BMT arrives?
This is just another example that the units Russia has to the north (so around Synkivka) are pretty much fresh recruits. They're doing the same mistakes other russian units did earlier in the war which leads to a disaster. One would think whoever the commander is there would talk to the higher ups within the russian MoD and learn from their past offensives further south before they launch an attack, but I guess not.
My guess is that whoever the commander is will get fired and replaced by a more competent one, we saw it happen after Ugledar amongst other places so yeah.. I truly wonder how some of the russian generals got their jobs.
Russian army is very different.
Thier only 20% of military are permanent, rest are conscript
And only 20% are trained by center rest are train by state not by central authority.
Now like all country in the world of course Russia will have few of their state which are very undeveloped or corrupt state minister who don't train troops properly, this is the case.
Imagine American troops train by Alaska state or China troops by xianjin or Tibet, etc etc
Nepotism probably, American military has the same issue where kissing ass is the preferred method of getting rank quickly (that and filling in the checkboxes).
those infantry could be supported by artillery and drones as well. The armored units don't have to stay there and become easy targets for Ukrainian drones maybe.
Thanks!
Isn't it obvious that tanks are used now only for landing infantry, making some shots and running back, cause both sides have thousands of drones in this hottest spots of the front
It's obvious to most people these days, both sides have been doing that
That Ukrainian footage of Synkivka, is a fairly obvious an edit, these guys are reinforcements there is clearly basement infrastructure to keep them safe, they get an opportunity to dig in at the flank. FPV drones are wonderful but they don't carry a lot of ammunition. Synkivka doesn't have a lot of artillery it's all being saved for Avdivka. I'm interested in why you think it's incompetent?
Thanks :)
Thank you for saying this. I constantly say this is a crazy war.
I agree with you. I've always struggled with their lack of vision.
If you or I do not understand it or see it, that does not mean there is no strategy involved. Depends on what the real goal is, and we do not know that. Expecting that you will see a strategy during the war is kinda enthusiastic. You can talk about it after the war after some time,....this is all hectic and ofc you can not see any strategy behind it. If you could see it then it would not be a very good strategy lol.
In war the enemy gets a vote.
It's not that either side is incompetent, but that there's a massive defenders advantage and the enemy gets to respond.
An attack must first clear a minefield, which warns your enemy that you're on the way, etc.
Weeb, you are still doing a good reporting for the person who is not on a frontline and without any access to the military satellites it is amazing how acquired your reports are.
thanks
Assaulting an entrenched enemy who also has serious firepower is just hard. There have been many failed attacks and assaults by both sides due to this. Every failure is a bad thing, but it should still be remembered that even failed attacks can have a strategic benefit by pinning the enemy down and causing some attrition for them (too).
I can explain why this incompetent assault happened. It’s pretty simple, some half dumb officer in grade of colonel was trying to show activity in his area of responsibility to his higher command.
One example & armchair General nerd thinks he knows better how to run a war based on what exactly ? Putin himself stated that they were in still operating in an active defence mode which is an adaption of the Clausewitz doctrine. There is total lack of any understanding of the the whole picture & as stated below due to drone & satellite coverage warfare has changed, then there is the political aspect that has to be considered. The other day he had a video titled total Genius .... & I recall back in May how confident he was in relation to the supposed encirclement of Bakhmut. Hopefully one day an actual military expert who has actually been under fire will learn the geek part & become a mapper of actual substance.
Cheers Weeb.
You want aggressive frontline actions but you forget the hundreds of thousands of soldiers Ukraine lost in their counteroffensive. Caution first.
Merry Christmas.
I believe the issue with the percieved slow rate of advance is mines. Per this video with the Russian armored attack the very first AFV was a engineering mine detanotor, which exploded mines going in and out of the battle zone. Let's say Russia captures this field. Most likely only the edges/treelines are safe from mines. Now Russia has to demine this area before they can begin actually using it. Not to mention their forces are now obviously located in the treelines/fencerows/edges of this field making it relatively easy for Ukraine to attack them. Once captured I would imagine a single field taking weeks to demine let's say by a 100 man unit all the while being subject to enemy fire. I presume the engineering units are working around the clock. A single mine can bring pause to a large operational unit.
Not to mention this kind of warfare is very similar to that fought in the bocage of Normandy. A nasty business it was. As bad as Omaha beach was the bocage across the entire beachhead was much worse when considering Allied casualties.
The problem is the weapons have changed but the tactics are not evolving quick enough to compensate. Until there is an effective counter to drones armour is vulnerable. I have said it before, perhaps the tank has had its day. Also they need to combine the new weapons better. If they fire air burst artillery that will force troops to take cover. Then that is the moment for the drones to work the bunkers, effects amplified by confined space. That may be a start of a new type of fire plan.
Feliz Navidad!
something tells me the bunch that were left in the beginning were foreign mercenary guys. Theres a recent interview of a few Nepali mercenaries that recently deserted talking about how they get taken to the front, and are given general instructions about what to do and left to fend for themselves after. This guy was talking about robotyne i think
While i understand what you're trying to get at Russia's current strategy is clearly working to their favor as they're provably wearing down both the Ukrainian armed force's and the Wests capacity/will to continue supporting the war.
This is a gradual process but you know what is said about slow and steady winning the race?
It's probably presumed to be better continuing to follow what seems to be working out for them rather than doing some kind of radical shift in strategy that could wind up in embarsment if they don't get feel themselves to be ready and confident in their success.
That being said if plans of that nature were in the works it would probably be around summer time when they'd rather go ahead with them, and for the time being what would make the most sense is not allowing the Ukrainian army any respite from their disastrous offensive.
That means amping up the pressure across all areas of the front but not necessarily going on an offensive or overly committing to any sector in particular.
Resource war, hence both sides take advantage of easy areas... attacking force normally takes a lot more casualties.
Russia doesn't want do destroy whole Ukraine, only their armed forces , and only in the territory that was already destroyed/abandoned from 2014. And Russian plan is to use attrition for their goal. Not saying they do everything perfect, there's a lot of fails, but their plan is definitely working.
" and only in the territory that was already destroyed/abandoned from 2014."
Wtf was Kyiv offensive then? Wtf was Bucha? Wtf????????
@@ilaripori6148 Kiev offensive was just a distraction/ gamble to force Ukraine to negotiate. There was never a plan to occupy Kiev, it was literally impossible with only 30-40k of troops. Bucha was one of Ukrainian fakes, same as snake island 🏝️, and ghost 👻 of Kiev
@@ilaripori6148 That is plan B after failiure to do intimidation tactics from the start of the war. Entire massive "Deep battle" ww2 style push was mostly that, because realistically, 200k soldiers couldn't really subdue Ukraine. Thing is , Ukrainian goverment is in deal with NATO and EU so they got guaranties to get massive support, and lot of bitter Ukrainians supported the war, so Russian intimidation failed, but only because Zelensky refused to sign peace deal in april.
the red flame is the flare for artileri mark? make the convoy panic to get out from the area
9:00 No, war is not about soldiers. War is about defeating your opponent. Theoretically you can pull out meteorite from its orbit, slam it into your enemy and win the war.
About your last points. Concentrating troops in this war is very difficult. Both armies are now mobilized army and its difficult to coordinate large scale operations. Both sides are heavily fortified an clearing that takes time and Mines make it more diffcult
The intensity of changes on the front line in the last two years makes the Russian advance in the first two weeks astonishing, can someone explain to me how they managed to occupy such large territories in a short period of time, while now they are unable to occupy a village, what is it about, the Ukrainians had artillery and anti-tank systems even before the war, what led to the fact that now no one can advance, while the Russians advanced at an incredible speed at the beginning?I also want to point out that no one is trying to explain the element of surprise because the USA had been warning about the attack for months
Ukraine was unprepared but the Russians couldnt hold their massive gains because of a lack of infantry. They only controlled the roads which were then subjected to ambushes.
Looks like a classic Charge of the Light Brigade
Merry christmas all.
What are the blue and red lines (areas) on the map? They are smaller than Ukraine oblasts (regions).
How can it be a team game, when there are no teams?
Out of interest what is your military experience weeb in terms of tactics and strategies? Or are you ex military?
Merry Christmas everybody
why should tanks stay there under artillery fire?are you crazy or what?
have you ever been at war,command any forces?i doubt that
The former minister of inner security of Ukraine Oleg Starikov said that Russians are tapping multiple positions across the line, looking for weak spots, making Ukraine react to their moves and tip the balance.
there is a MacGregor quote out there: Ukraine may have lost KIA 500k and WIA 1000k
regarding the 10th ? UAF mobilisation wave - including women - very young+old men - which may inflict the workforce
-> the russian operational plan may work out - plausible
with the current overall front length - the UAF is dangerous as long the could - by luck penetrate the russian defenses and exploit them with raids
-> therefore the offensive capable units had to be decimated and the breakthrough-tools+necessities
as Ukraine seems to start some digging in - perhaps they estimate their own offensive capabilities been to weak to execute a "victory manouver"
i expect russia to play their asses/assets - as the sowjet-union did after kursk - attacking on various points with overwhelming force
forcing the mobile reaction forces to exhaust in hastly containment attempts
bagration - the destruction of armygroup centre - was not the manstein-like galician-option (hitler and his hc expected) but an overwhelming number of "clockwise" attacks (2-wings 1-binding) ... and this devastating victory happened when the russian regular army lacked career infantry but had great superiority in artillery/tanks/airforce
7:40---Neither side can make deep penetrations with pincers to cut off large swathes of territory a la WW II unless they can establish air superiority (including counters to drones). Otherwise their spearheads will simply become isolated from logistical support and reinforcement with consequent annihilation or capture. Without air cover the other elements of combined-arms warfare are largely irrelevant on this cutting-edge postmodern battlefield. As US retired general Hodges said recently, NATO ground forces would not be committed to this type of conventional war without first establishing air superiority. It's Priority Number One.
Z
I want to know, how these artillary exactly hit opponent moving vehicle exactly on Target from so far away?
On defense, arty already got every square meter of that ground measured and marked. Add in to that modern tools, sensors, drones, satelites and such.
@@kaletovhangar i understand it have range like that much kilometres etc, but it random right, a drone can tell u the exact location but how a artillery hit exactly on moving target, it don't have any auto detection features right?
@@_SuRyA_. Well, I don't really know the minute details of that. Internet probably has some sites and UA-cam channels who deal with such topics.
it was mines, not artillery.
@@kingfish99 ok it was mime but we always heard that artillery hit those moving vehicle and destroyed or moving tank, what about that
It is not a war, but a special combat mission, you know.
Large-scale operations are risky, and neither side is willing to endure WW2-size casualties (or to accept political responsibilities for them). The often-mentioned transparancy of the battlefield increases the stakes even further due to the impossibility of concentrating large enough forces without being noticed. Lastly, everyone lacks the experience (or sometimes communication equipment) necessary for managing such operations.
I mean, you are probably right about the incompetance of the military higher-ups. But there are objective limitations of what can be done in the circamstances of this war.
The author is either a fool or playing to him.. Of course, the armored vehicles had to stand in the Sinkovka and wait for them to be burned by drones..Amazing unprofessionalism from the author
Why did the front tank took a b line to the left lol and left the whole column. That did seem cartoony
Ever think that drones have rewritten the book and generals are struggling to find solutions?
The penny is starting to drop for Weeb.
War is a mixture of many small successes and defeats. The side who, on the whole, collects most successes will win. Not every defeat on this "small" scale is a "disaster", no matter which side is affected. These days, we tend to go ballistic with little things and blow stuff out of all proportion.
In this incident, we hardly know what orders the Russian tanks/BMPs had, or whether their gun jammed etc.. You would hope that every assault unit has anti-tank equipment at hand, is covered by ATGM and drone operators. It might happen 500 times, and a couple of times it does not. While the latter is bad for the people involved, on the whole, it won't change much.
To be more clear: go over to military summary instaead. Ukraine showed them repelling the attack. Only after did the Russian forces release this video showing they did take control, not the other wat round. As we saw, this heavy ukr fire from armored vehicles was some troops with atgms and madpads. We caN see them hop out the back of the buildings after. They didnt last.
You often use news from the battlefield but word of mouth in a morale game is useless. Most other mappers use a geolocated video or ir didnt happen but, trying to be the first it seems, ive found regular assumptions here that conflict with geolocated videos.
👏👏👏
Hi
Remember, according to americans Russia only have shovels left...
What you meant to say is called "probing"...
Russian dont wanna send soldiers to slautgher, like those highly moral people of Ukraine
Russia does have the ability for larger and more mobile operations, like in early 2022. Questions is rather 'why do it' and/or 'when do it'. I think Russians owns this war, and they will for sure make USA-NATO pay as much as possible. Attrition, when Russia wins 10:1 is that way.
With both countries having sophisticated Reconnaissance and Surveillance, they can basically see everything what the enemy is doing. From moving armored vehicles, troop movements, artillery, supply trucks and all aircrafts in the area. There is no secret operation to be made.
The Idea of Blitzkrieg or big combine assault is totally dead, unless one is willing to loose such heavy casualties to gain an uncertain advantage. The things that US and NATO can do in Iraq or Afghanistan only works on 3rd world countries without proper sophisticated surveillance.
If you even started to group your troops, machineries, supplies in one area to prepare for an Assault, NATO satellites can see them real time (as well as the Russians) and inform the Ukrainians to make equal preparations for defense.
Putin knew the West key aim isn’t winning Ukraine, their real aim is to have Russia waste all their resources and men in the war, that would make the Russian military helpless and spent. At the same time for NATO and US to spend as little resources as possibly. (Unfortunately, they sent in so many expensive stuff already that they’re not supposed to initially. I.e. Abrams, Leopards and F-16)
Putin decided to play the long game, and with the use Ukrainian-Russian Militia, Chechen and Wagner Mercenaries…. better to keep it safe and grind the Ukrainians. Ukrainian economy and war machine is in shatters, while in Russia they were able to storm through much economic sanctions imposed on them and the war hardly touches the ordinary citizens. Their Agricultural sector is doing great, and with China’s bad famine this year, they have a steady customer. Oil sales is properly protected by OPEC. Their Nuclear Energy industry to other countries is booming and is in no danger being sanctioned since the majority of nuclear materials used by US power plants came from Russia.They have the proper condition to go through it, as long as no big terrible disaster is to happen, that would sour public opinion.
I guess the winter is grinding time and shaping the battlefield and spring will be the offensive. Or whatever. Who knows. An offensive will not come from southeast.
I've heard that certain Russian units, being prisoners given a chance to serve, aren't given proper training, air support or real backing at all. They are sent directly to the most dangerous sections of the fighting, and if they can't or don't advance for any reason, "driver units" will shoot them dead. This is where the "human wave" attacks by Russians equipped with shovels came from, I guess. I'm curious about this. Is it true at all?
😎
God Bless Rassia !
From Genius Strategy just a day ago to total disaster. Just the way the winds of war go l guess!
Yeah... he's doing a great job with maps and collecting all the data from different sources. But his analysis... oh man
@@Chebka_he's right though, Russia isn't some Uber undefeatable military juggernaut they have made absolutely massive failures during this war and have many issues from logistics problems to bad tactics and commanders.
@@SergyMilitaryRankings I agree with that. I hardly disagree with "incompetent generals" part. I think these generals (on both sides) are the most competent in the world right now. Also these "big arrow offensive" talks are just ridiculous. He's just farming views at this point
@@Chebka_ yeah this is a real war, which is slow gains, comparisons can be WWII, Vietnam or Korea
Your commentary is hilarious. NATAO trained Nato armed Ukraine forces over 900,000 of them, now 550,000 dead .65 Countries armed these Nazis in Ukraine, every typs of missiles, tanks, all destroyed, to date Russia as used 300,000 troops and rotated them, they have 450 000 in reserve who have not seen action . Nato G7 just spent $75 billion or a counteroffensive, Ukraine lost 190,000 troops trained in Nato country purpousley for this, they gained 7 Km x 12 km of ground in Robatinio,now its gone, they lost all the gains in Bahmut, they had 10 years to fortify, Adeevka, and losing that. $85 billion , $190, 000 dead since June 8, till November 12, what a fucking waste fighting for the NATO NAZIS . Nato USA are desert fighters like in Afghanistan 21 years nothing gained, 20 years in Iraq Nothing Gained, 12 years in Syria nothing gained, 15 years in Vietnma nothing gained . Basically Nato USA have lost every battel since WW2
Wide spread use of drones is why no side can make a significant advance, footage of them just mauling soldiers from both sides is horrific.
Yeah Sinkovka was supposed to be taken months back. Incompetence of commanders
Nothing to do with incompetence
Good analysis
The problem with tanks in modern warfare like in ukraine its so easy to pierce armour, so sending armour unsupported into an area with high heavy weapon concentration is gauranteed to fail. They should be sending the armour at least the less armoured vehicles to areas where there is no heavy weaponry to counter them and they need to support the armoured assults with infantry to essentially act as screens and also so that the infantry is taking the main brunt of the attack especially since theyve decided to turn all their tanks into spg's regardless sending an armoured force in on its own is gauranteed to fail unless the force is so overwhelming in number that the ukrainian guns are overwhelmed before they manage to take down all the tanks its still a good idea then to send in infantry to help deaal with manpads and such
Imagine storming Synkivka instead of just buying Mass Effect Legendary Edition on steam winter sale.
🍻
I'm starting to notice a trend here, wonder if Zelensky sees it too
The only trend is that tanks in 2023 are useless.
The only trend Zelensky sees is dwindling support from US/NATO
I also think that the russians simply don‘t need to push harder because Ukraine will go bankrupt in 2024 first month
Doubtful they sent reinforcements because they watched the Weeb video, obviously. They can also read maps.
According to Chinese military theory, the Russian offensive did not concentrate enough technical weapons and personnel. How is it possible to directly launch infantry and tank attacks without weakening Ukraine's deep strike capabilities?even， Without the cover of tanks and armored vehicles, how can the light infantry attack the fortress? If there are no armed helicopters, can't FPV drones also provide cover? The Russians' performance at Kupyansk was a textbook failure.
the Russian commander in the north didn't play enough strategy games growing up
I thought for sec that I was watching a video game.
8:38 nobe of the sides wants to fight, that’s the reason they don’t do anything
This perfectly shows why the ubiquity of quality ISR from drones make assaults exceedingly difficult.
The tanks and IFVs likely were ordered to fall back for fear of them attracting artillery fire if they stayed in the open and supported the infantry who for their part while they were in cover were in obvious positions just due to the nature of this particular battlefield.
That Ukrainian vehicle would have been dead to rights if the infantry had any AT rockets, which if the plan was to immediately pull back their Armored support I don't know why they weren't equipped with at least one or two.
Then they'd have at least blunted the Ukrainian counterattack and forced them to try and dislodge them with either dwindling artillery stocks or a renewed Ukrainian counterattack.
Clearly the Russian army still has some things to learn.
@WeebUnionWU, fix your mic please. You changed something of late and now there are high and low pitches throughout the vid.