Remember when Russia ran away at Kherson? A retreat to consolidate forces, reach more defendable positions, shorten supplylines. Its a thing and when done right it works. Doesnt matter if you are Ukrainian or Russian. The main difference being that in Kursk, Ukraine knows they cant hold on for ever. In Kherson, and elsewhere, Russia thought they would hold on for the foreseeable future.
@@Dimension37 Huh? It got posted here? How weird. Anyway, yeah, point still stands: falling back on the tactical, operational and strategical level can have a positive effect, even if it means losing territory.
Nice, I mostly look at the bigger picture. It was nice seeing a more detailed analysis and maps. It gives a new perspective. There are many opinions going around, but you are clear and logical. Some people don't seem to understand the war won't stop at the border. Why would they just retreat? Of course painful sacrifices must be made and avoidable losses have been incurred. That doesn't make it a failure. It also shows how much the details matter. They all matter and they will be remembered.
Everyone knows once the Russians push Ukraine from Kursk Oblast they will try to continue to the Dnipro River . Why the Kursk offensive is a waste of men and equipment
Like and shared! Will watch later;-) Some side notes. People forget what Kursk is all about. Georgie from Ukraine matters made a great vid about that on 15 august, i reposted the link to my audience. No sober soul expected Ukraine to hold all Russian soil forever, this was part of the plan. What matters is taking (ground) war to the soil of your opponent. Besides mobile warfare they can also conduct grinding defense - without losing or destroying Ukrainian territority. In 2025, Ukraine is likely able to conduct offensive warfare on a size double or even more compared to Kursk as primary exameple. They ramped up own production, as well got a ***load of allied support recent weeks. 13 brigades and a second army, fit for offensive warfare.
@@cz1589 anyway you try to spin it, having the supply road cut off is not good. they likely done in veseloe also now as russians can just bring in as many supplies and reinforcements they want to. its the reality they dont have enough men in kursk. its not overwhelming forces either. its just 37k russian soldiers in kursk.
there is some solid hope. the recent loss of ammunition depots, including (the very recent) loss of the stockpile at Bryansk (which i assume is the local supply hub for Kursk?) should begin to have an effect on Russ operations. in a sense i see Kursk as a microcosm of the what i believe is Ukraine's best grand strategy: play defense, trade space for time, and continue to hit strategic economic & logistics targets with the intention of collapsing the opponents economy (in Kursk proper it would be more attiring the supply-side to bring about a favorable outcome).
Promised to watch - about 60% at 1.5 speed, does that count haha. Cant help myself and will probably share your video's for times to come. Alas...no reinforcements here ;-) Anyway, mainstream public and media hardly knows differences between strategic, operational and tactical levels. Thus, they **** to understand the succes in that perspective as well. Tactical wins and losses are just part of the micro-game. From a strategic point, its already succesfull - binding Russians for months. I expect this to continue through the entire winter at least. Six months keeping experienced forces occupied, as you said. So from that perspective, it was a good move ANYWAY. With enough operational succes as well that matters. With a strategic win, it doesnt mean a permanent gain. Russian could set up new strategic countermeasures, here or on other frontlines. But so far, the Kursk push wasnt punished in other directions beyond expectations. So, it didnt backfired in strategic perspective. True, on long-term, things can change. But thats war all about - this strategy worked, period.
Thanks for the update. I'm sure it's difficult to interpret how things are going sometimes. Rybar recently criticised russian claims saying advances have been greatly exaggerated or non existent in some cases. Anyway thanks
Oh yeah, for sure. We have seen evidence of that time and time again that Russian claims very often is complete BS. That is why its so important to wait for confirmation from several maps. And also why ISW lists much of Russias advances as "claimed" and not Confirmed.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone we will have to see what happens. if that supply road is cut off. they are done in northern kursk. then russians just push east to next supply road.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone update from sarcastosaurus confirms what is happening in kursk. its worse as russians pushing down from shepikovka to try to link up at novoivanovka. from there if they move to malaya lokna they cut off ukrainians in the entire north of there by taking supply roads if they dont retreat from there. he said its a division pushing ukraine from snagost to novoivanovka and russians are in control of it. they pushed ukraine to southern part of lyubimovka also so dont have to worry about getting hit across open fields. he said the problem is shortage of air defence and artlllery shells for ukraine in kursk or rest of ukraine. chasiv yar not looking good. problems everywhere. even selydove looking like they will have to leave it or be encircled as the units north and south of it couldnt hold. he says khurakove may fall by december. then the battle of pokrovsk and myrnograde will begin.
It’s just a suggestion, but have you ever thought of buying a new headset? But who am I? Maybe it was a wedding present or an inheritance from your grandmother.
Что касается Веселого... то с возобновлением наступления русских на Любимовку, можно констатировать, что рейд всу на Веселое провалился целиком и полностью. Для его возобновления всу необходимо ввести в бой новые силы... а есть ли они? это большой вопрос.
So what you are saying is that Ukraine needs more FASCAM munitions to hobble moskovite manouver options around Snagost and that the delay of munitions deliveries caused by the nazi-republican trait0rs in the US was one of the biggest reasons for Ukraines inability to secure Koronevo? At least that's my personal speculation.
For sure. Russia used arty-mines effectively to trap Ukrainians during the Ukrainian offensive of 2023, dropping mines behind Ukrainian units advancing. So Ukraine would deffinately put them to good use around Snagost and Ljubomovka. As for Koronevo, I have no idea why Ukraine failed in pushing in. Its far into Russia, and Im guessing it didnt take long for Russian command to realize they needed to focus forces in that town
The reason they pulled it of is maybe because they have more controls then your map show, If not we would have seen large casualties from the push over an open field. Several sources have said that Ukraine pulling out of Kursk area and that is the reason this push came, they have just already pulled out of north west. A pinch of salt, but it may be some truth in it. There are no 40-60k geolocated number of troops that is just BS as you use to say, if they had the 15k Ukraine units would be pushed out, they can’t defend against such an superior force without fortification, and there are no fortifications in Kursk to speak of. They have geolocated units, but just because they have geolocated units from 810th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade as an example in Kursk it does not mean the entire Brigade is in the region, both Russia and Ukraine transfers parts of brigades to reinforce areas all over the front, company size, battalion size, drone units with 25 men from a specific unit does not mean the entire brigade is in the area. But please, a source for this geolocated manpower? Kursk is a relative small fight in this war, if there would be up to 75 000 troops in this area we would have seen huge amount of forces on film, but we don’t, we se small attacks with a few units at most, take Vaseloe as an example, maybe 50-100 men may defend that town, same type of troops attacking, in total there may be some 20-30k troops tops in Kursk area. What is the largest units you actually seen at one moment? Failure or not, up for debate, the problem with Kursk is that all they lost in Donbas, not what they will or have lost in Kursk. And casualties, what did they all lose in Kursk? You seams very clear that Russia gained huge amount of casualties and Ukraine did not, what do you actually base that on, geolocated destroyed systems? Dead soldiers? Or the standard Ukrainian government source?
F me you really know jack sh*t about F all 😂 Basic military theory saysyou should try and achieve at least a 3 to 1 advantage in any given firefight. Against defenses a 5 to 1 advantage. If Ukraine pushed in with 10k-15k troops, how many troops would Russia deploy to Kursk using standard military logic?
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzoneWhen you start by the words you use, you loose all your credibility. Why so hard to actually have a discussion as adults? With factual information, sources, logic and common sense, meet me with that instead of BS, f***, Sh**. Yes, you shall try to have a force that are at least 3-1, and TRY is the magic word, just because that’s the theory it’s not always what you have in reality, especially in this war that have thrown away most of what we know about modern war. We can take Veseloe as an example, if we assume that 50 men defending that town the Ukranian forces should be at least 250 men strong when they are attacking, and we both know that’s not the case because if you send 250 men out on those fields the majority will die from artillery and drone, so they send smaller teams that are harder to hit. But again, bet you have lots of videos with assaults of this sizes in Kursk? Massive Russian armour assault, 20-25 Tanks and AIFV? If Ukraine used 15k troops they would need about 60-70 according to standard logic, but this is not standard, they never pulled out troops from other area in this extend. There are absolutely zero proof of this number of troops, not even the 15k Ukrainian forces. Answer toward what I wrote. Have you seen this number of troops? Have you seen this numbers of casualties your talking about? Have anyone actually seen even a small part of all those forces? You see the attacks, take the CV-90 that got hit outside, Vaseloe what was it that attacked? An mechanised battalion? Or an Ukrainian infantry platoon with 2-3 AIFV support?
@@MrCastodian Yes, you attack with smaller forces over open ground. But those smaller forces, 9-18 troops, still need to deal with troops in a defensive position once they dismount close to enemy positions. So if you need a 3 or 5 to 1 advantage in a firefight, but arrive with 9-18 guys to fight 9-18, what do you think happens? Slow advances? lots of casualties? Difficulty maintaining a presence? There is a reason why we are seeing so high casualty figures, why the frontlines are moving slowly. You need the 3 and 5 to 1 advantage, probably even more now with drones, so you have enough troops to exploit a situation when you actually do manage to secure a foothold. 50,000 Russians vs 10,000 Ukrainians sounds perfectly logical and makes perfect sense. There is nothing weird about those numbers at all. If anything, it is proof that Russian generals are competent, understands what they need in order to stand a chance of achieving success and they waited until they had those forces in place before launching a credible counter-push in Kursk. You had the big push out of Borki that failed, lots of troops, lots of vehicles. The same thing when Russia moved out of Koronevo and then moved towards Ljubomovka. Casualties are mounting which is a clear indication that you now, more than ever, need enough soldiers to achieve success. You putting this into question is kinda laughable. Then again, you are a Russian apologist who thinks its ok for Russia to kidnap children and bomb hospitals and target civilians with terror-attacks.
@@MrCastodian when you start by spamming nazi-moskovite ideology and maskirovka, you never had any credibility to claim superiority from in the first place, vatnik.
Yes, slow advance, lots of casualties, difficulties maintaining a presence, that’s what happening. Do that sounds familiar in this war? You NEED that, but no one have that exact for specific frontline areas we’re Russia attack fortified cities in Donbas, but rest of the front, small forces. There are a lot that is strange with this numbers and you refuse to really answer my questions strait up about it. When did you se even remotely close to this amount of soldiers in Kursk, and then I mean both Ukrainian and Russian forces? When did you se the amount of casualties you talk about, both Russian and Ukrainian? The example you say is small attacks. Take the start of the Kursk counter offensive, we saw at most 10 Russian AIFV and Tanks in one assault. Ukrainian assault on Vaseloye, a few AIFV one day and a Tank the next day. How many defender can you guess are in Vaseloye, or in some of the towns hat Russia attacking? 25-50, tops 100 and a few APC and a random Tank? And obviously you have to end the text with some pathetic comment we’re you are attacking me as a individual, and the only thing you do by that is to put holes in you own argument, a looser mentality. If I was supporting what you say, then fine, now I don’t, so stop making an idiot of yourself and take a discussion as an adult man. And outing something in to question is something that everyone should do, including you, you should ent believe what is reported without factual evidence, if your a parrot for Kiev then fine, if not, demand facts and proof, question.
If Ukrainian invaded kurks with 10 thousand soldiers & were not planning to take kurks nuclear plant. That means Russia invaded Ukrainian territory with about 180 thousand soldiers. They were not planning to take the whole Ukrainian territory as well
Because Putler got crap intelligence reports of pleasers. He assumed it was all a computer game : take the capital and you win. Thats why the Kjiv push failed. True, Russians didnt expect Ukraine to hold for months. Just one kick and the building would collapse. Big mistake. Russia had to reset their whole agenda. Opening soviet stocks and shift from a failed blitzkrieg to long-term war.
@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone u must be very slow 🐌. That means Russia was not planning to take the whole Ukrainian country with 180 to 200 thousand soldiers because u can't hold a big country like Ukraine with that number of soldiers. Remember, the 180 thousand soldiers number comes from serky and international study of war, not from Russia
Да что, черт тебя побери, ты несешь?))) Если цель всу продержаться как можно дольше... то какого хрена они полезли в атаку на открытой местности? А узкая низина от Суджи до Коренево, самое плохое место для обороны во всей округе. Возможно поэтому у русских там и не было практически никакой обороны. всу нужно было или окапываться на высотах вдоль своей границы... тогда они бы дольше продержались меньшими силами и с меньшими потерями... Или уж идти в атаку дальше... Полностью брать под контроль дорогу Суджа - Коренево - Рыльск... и сходу забираться на холмы. Я с самого начала полагал, что именно это всу смогут сделать... и судя по поведению всу, они и пытались сделать. Но когда провалился второй накат на Коренево, когда не смогли зайти на высоты возле Рыльска... нужно было уходить... Но девиз всу - слабоумие и отвага... они просто не в состоянии трезво оценить ситуацию и осознать, что продолжение борьбы на конкретном участке, приносит больше вреда, чем пользы и нужно уйти на более выгодные позиции. А когда решают отойти, ситуация уже безнадежная и при отходе теряют от 50 до 75% личного состава и почти всю оставшуюся технику. Хотя нужно отметить, что к тому времени, когда ситуация становится безнадежной, всу почти всегда успевают заменить штурмовые части на отряды территориальной обороны. Теперь да... русские сформировали новый фронт... и когда всу начнут отход, русские последуют за ними...
@@cz1589 знали бы Вы насколько мне безразлично, будет это кто-то читать или нет.... кто захочет, тот найдет, прочтет и поймет... только мне без разницы))) Я прихожу на такие каналы, чтобы услышать другую точку зрения и либо принять ее, либо высказать несогласие. А уж как это будет воспринято... это дело другой стороны...)
@@cz1589 ленивый? можно сказать и так... просто я делаю это в перерывах рабочего дня) За чашечкой кофе и с печеньем))) Так что у меня нет цели, кому-то что-то доказать)))
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone Fog of war! its only a matter of time before Ukraine is pushed back. Russia has already taken about 40% of Kursk back. Its too big. too many fields. no mine fields, Ukraine didn't dig trenches and fortifications. Ukraine only control farms and flat fields. Adolf and Napoleon learned from this. Now the New Fascist will learn. I study history my friend and it has not been kind to invaders of Russia. That is all!
@@solidfoelife oh, you study history? Then you know that Sweden annexed Russian territory for a century and later on the Russian army was fleeing from the Swedes for years, begging for a sieze-fire and a peace-agreement? Right? You did know that I trust 😅 Granted, the Swedish king was suffering a bit from hubris after winning every battle while being outnumbered 5 to 1 at every turn, but hey, it is what it is 😂
They took moscow in 1610 but they was destroyed a year later. It's easy to take land but to keep it is another story. Taking a little land here and there. but since the 1900 they always get their lick back and more
yes this is normal with maneuver warfare, Russians do big clumsy poorly coordinated offensives at Kursk, Ukrainians dance around them inflict as much damage on the attackers all the while also attacking their logistics , and the Russian offensive shortly stops and peters off then the Ukrainains hit the offensive thrust on the flanks and rear which forces the Russians to retreat inflicting even more heavy losses on the Russians, and the Russians do it all over again and the Ukrainians also do the same all over again. Russians simply do not ahve the logistics to conduct multiple large coordinated attacks which could cause an operational defeat and breakthrough thru Ukrainains lines in Kursk and the Donbass. Their attacks do not last too long and bog down fast and become prone to Ukrainian counterattacks. Which also makes the Russians committ more forces and result in even more losses for the Russians which taxes the Russian economy.
@@johnwalsh4857 you are speaking like you are general and knows all about conflict and judging by your name you are English or American.Probably English and knows only what your government tell you, which means nothing.There is a word I will like to use but my comment will be censured.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone just a snowflake...you must be a real man to wear this headset. Spoiled brats cant face reality and loss of comfort. It ain a perfect world - we have to learn to deal with it.
Once again a very informative update. Thank you Skruffy 🤗✌️❤️🇺🇦
Remember when Russia ran away at Kherson? A retreat to consolidate forces, reach more defendable positions, shorten supplylines. Its a thing and when done right it works. Doesnt matter if you are Ukrainian or Russian. The main difference being that in Kursk, Ukraine knows they cant hold on for ever. In Kherson, and elsewhere, Russia thought they would hold on for the foreseeable future.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzonedid u mean to respond to me?
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzoneyou must admit that the kursk is a complete failure & had no reason for it happen
@@Dimension37 you aren't that important, troll farmer...🤡
@@Dimension37 Huh? It got posted here? How weird. Anyway, yeah, point still stands: falling back on the tactical, operational and strategical level can have a positive effect, even if it means losing territory.
Nice, I mostly look at the bigger picture. It was nice seeing a more detailed analysis and maps. It gives a new perspective. There are many opinions going around, but you are clear and logical. Some people don't seem to understand the war won't stop at the border. Why would they just retreat? Of course painful sacrifices must be made and avoidable losses have been incurred. That doesn't make it a failure. It also shows how much the details matter. They all matter and they will be remembered.
Everyone knows once the Russians push Ukraine from Kursk Oblast they will try to continue to the Dnipro River .
Why the Kursk offensive is a waste of men and equipment
Like and shared! Will watch later;-) Some side notes.
People forget what Kursk is all about. Georgie from Ukraine matters made a great vid about that on 15 august, i reposted the link to my audience. No sober soul expected Ukraine to hold all Russian soil forever, this was part of the plan.
What matters is taking (ground) war to the soil of your opponent. Besides mobile warfare they can also conduct grinding defense - without losing or destroying Ukrainian territority.
In 2025, Ukraine is likely able to conduct offensive warfare on a size double or even more compared to Kursk as primary exameple. They ramped up own production, as well got a ***load of allied support recent weeks. 13 brigades and a second army, fit for offensive warfare.
LOL is that why the defenses in donbass & everywhere on the eastern front have been collapsing? 1000’s of sqr km monthly 🤣
This logic makes no sense, ukraine is taking huge losses by attempting to hold this territory
@@Dimension37 bs reply uno
@@Dimension37 bs reply duo
@@cz1589 anyway you try to spin it, having the supply road cut off is not good. they likely done in veseloe also now as russians can just bring in as many supplies and reinforcements they want to. its the reality they dont have enough men in kursk. its not overwhelming forces either. its just 37k russian soldiers in kursk.
there is some solid hope. the recent loss of ammunition depots, including (the very recent) loss of the stockpile at Bryansk (which i assume is the local supply hub for Kursk?) should begin to have an effect on Russ operations. in a sense i see Kursk as a microcosm of the what i believe is Ukraine's best grand strategy: play defense, trade space for time, and continue to hit strategic economic & logistics targets with the intention of collapsing the opponents economy (in Kursk proper it would be more attiring the supply-side to bring about a favorable outcome).
it looks like Russia recovered roughly 50% of the territory.
Thanks, SkruffyTalez.
Promised to watch - about 60% at 1.5 speed, does that count haha. Cant help myself and will probably share your video's for times to come. Alas...no reinforcements here ;-)
Anyway, mainstream public and media hardly knows differences between strategic, operational and tactical levels. Thus, they **** to understand the succes in that perspective as well. Tactical wins and losses are just part of the micro-game.
From a strategic point, its already succesfull - binding Russians for months. I expect this to continue through the entire winter at least. Six months keeping experienced forces occupied, as you said. So from that perspective, it was a good move ANYWAY. With enough operational succes as well that matters.
With a strategic win, it doesnt mean a permanent gain. Russian could set up new strategic countermeasures, here or on other frontlines. But so far, the Kursk push wasnt punished in other directions beyond expectations. So, it didnt backfired in strategic perspective.
True, on long-term, things can change. But thats war all about - this strategy worked, period.
Thanks for the update. I'm sure it's difficult to interpret how things are going sometimes. Rybar recently criticised russian claims saying advances have been greatly exaggerated or non existent in some cases. Anyway thanks
Oh yeah, for sure. We have seen evidence of that time and time again that Russian claims very often is complete BS. That is why its so important to wait for confirmation from several maps. And also why ISW lists much of Russias advances as "claimed" and not Confirmed.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzoneUkrainians have spouted a lot of bs aswell lol, both sides that are not corrabarted by both sides is considered claimed.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone we will have to see what happens. if that supply road is cut off. they are done in northern kursk. then russians just push east to next supply road.
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone update from sarcastosaurus confirms what is happening in kursk. its worse as russians pushing down from shepikovka to try to link up at novoivanovka. from there if they move to malaya lokna they cut off ukrainians in the entire north of there by taking supply roads if they dont retreat from there.
he said its a division pushing ukraine from snagost to novoivanovka and russians are in control of it. they pushed ukraine to southern part of lyubimovka also so dont have to worry about getting hit across open fields.
he said the problem is shortage of air defence and artlllery shells for ukraine in kursk or rest of ukraine.
chasiv yar not looking good. problems everywhere. even selydove looking like they will have to leave it or be encircled as the units north and south of it couldnt hold.
he says khurakove may fall by december.
then the battle of pokrovsk and myrnograde will begin.
I like how he explained the cope here compared to other youtubers lmao
Explain the cope? Ive been saying this would happen all along 😅
It’s just a suggestion, but have you ever thought of buying a new headset? But who am I? Maybe it was a wedding present or an inheritance from your grandmother.
😂😂😂 Hmmm...
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone btw, Defense Express posted artilce about the CB-90 donated to ukraine
Nooo brother it is part of his trade mark!!! He just needs to say the thing at the staft of the video hahaha
I disagree. An army on the move is vulnerable. In the past we have seen skilled commanders do this type of active defense over and over.
Disagree with what?
Thanks
Can you please do a video about the Fh77?
Se non sbaglio Puti aveva dichiarato che entro il 1 OTTOBRE KUSK DOVEVA RITORNARE IN MANI Russe
“Strategic retreat” 🤣🤣
I like your map a lot better
Thanks! I appreciate it 🤘
those isolated rusian bits, don't seem to have any roads to them to maintain supplies, once it starts raining in ernest it will all be mud.
What about ukraine? Does the rain just magically miss ukraine?
@@Dimension37 its raining in kursk now apparently., and that's the bit the tube is about.
yah it is signifcant since the Ukrainains are smartly retreating then hit the offensive on the flanks and rear.
Maybe a run through first before publishing.
Wheres the fun in that 😅
Что касается Веселого... то с возобновлением наступления русских на Любимовку, можно констатировать, что рейд всу на Веселое провалился целиком и полностью. Для его возобновления всу необходимо ввести в бой новые силы... а есть ли они? это большой вопрос.
Could it be a motti?
So what you are saying is that Ukraine needs more FASCAM munitions to hobble moskovite manouver options around Snagost and that the delay of munitions deliveries caused by the nazi-republican trait0rs in the US was one of the biggest reasons for Ukraines inability to secure Koronevo?
At least that's my personal speculation.
For sure. Russia used arty-mines effectively to trap Ukrainians during the Ukrainian offensive of 2023, dropping mines behind Ukrainian units advancing. So Ukraine would deffinately put them to good use around Snagost and Ljubomovka. As for Koronevo, I have no idea why Ukraine failed in pushing in. Its far into Russia, and Im guessing it didnt take long for Russian command to realize they needed to focus forces in that town
Geez Skruff, can’t you get hold of a headset that ain’t so clapped out?
Yes, I can 😅
I’ll buy you coffee when you do. 😊
The reason they pulled it of is maybe because they have more controls then your map show,
If not we would have seen large casualties from the push over an open field.
Several sources have said that Ukraine pulling out of Kursk area and that is the reason this push came, they have just already pulled out of north west.
A pinch of salt, but it may be some truth in it.
There are no 40-60k geolocated number of troops that is just BS as you use to say, if they had the 15k Ukraine units would be pushed out, they can’t defend against such an superior force without fortification, and there are no fortifications in Kursk to speak of.
They have geolocated units, but just because they have geolocated units from 810th Guards Naval Infantry Brigade as an example in Kursk it does not mean the entire Brigade is in the region, both Russia and Ukraine transfers parts of brigades to reinforce areas all over the front, company size, battalion size, drone units with 25 men from a specific unit does not mean the entire brigade is in the area.
But please, a source for this geolocated manpower?
Kursk is a relative small fight in this war, if there would be up to 75 000 troops in this area we would have seen huge amount of forces on film, but we don’t, we se small attacks with a few units at most, take Vaseloe as an example, maybe 50-100 men may defend that town, same type of troops attacking, in total there may be some 20-30k troops tops in Kursk area.
What is the largest units you actually seen at one moment?
Failure or not, up for debate, the problem with Kursk is that all they lost in Donbas, not what they will or have lost in Kursk.
And casualties, what did they all lose in Kursk?
You seams very clear that Russia gained huge amount of casualties and Ukraine did not, what do you actually base that on, geolocated destroyed systems?
Dead soldiers?
Or the standard Ukrainian government source?
F me you really know jack sh*t about F all 😂
Basic military theory saysyou should try and achieve at least a 3 to 1 advantage in any given firefight. Against defenses a 5 to 1 advantage.
If Ukraine pushed in with 10k-15k troops, how many troops would Russia deploy to Kursk using standard military logic?
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzoneWhen you start by the words you use, you loose all your credibility.
Why so hard to actually have a discussion as adults?
With factual information, sources, logic and common sense, meet me with that instead of BS, f***, Sh**.
Yes, you shall try to have a force that are at least 3-1, and TRY is the magic word, just because that’s the theory it’s not always what you have in reality, especially in this war that have thrown away most of what we know about modern war.
We can take Veseloe as an example, if we assume that 50 men defending that town the Ukranian forces should be at least 250 men strong when they are attacking, and we both know that’s not the case because if you send 250 men out on those fields the majority will die from artillery and drone, so they send smaller teams that are harder to hit.
But again, bet you have lots of videos with assaults of this sizes in Kursk?
Massive Russian armour assault, 20-25 Tanks and AIFV?
If Ukraine used 15k troops they would need about 60-70 according to standard logic, but this is not standard, they never pulled out troops from other area in this extend.
There are absolutely zero proof of this number of troops, not even the 15k Ukrainian forces.
Answer toward what I wrote.
Have you seen this number of troops?
Have you seen this numbers of casualties your talking about?
Have anyone actually seen even a small part of all those forces?
You see the attacks, take the CV-90 that got hit outside, Vaseloe what was it that attacked? An mechanised battalion? Or an Ukrainian infantry platoon with 2-3 AIFV support?
@@MrCastodian Yes, you attack with smaller forces over open ground. But those smaller forces, 9-18 troops, still need to deal with troops in a defensive position once they dismount close to enemy positions. So if you need a 3 or 5 to 1 advantage in a firefight, but arrive with 9-18 guys to fight 9-18, what do you think happens? Slow advances? lots of casualties? Difficulty maintaining a presence? There is a reason why we are seeing so high casualty figures, why the frontlines are moving slowly. You need the 3 and 5 to 1 advantage, probably even more now with drones, so you have enough troops to exploit a situation when you actually do manage to secure a foothold.
50,000 Russians vs 10,000 Ukrainians sounds perfectly logical and makes perfect sense. There is nothing weird about those numbers at all. If anything, it is proof that Russian generals are competent, understands what they need in order to stand a chance of achieving success and they waited until they had those forces in place before launching a credible counter-push in Kursk. You had the big push out of Borki that failed, lots of troops, lots of vehicles. The same thing when Russia moved out of Koronevo and then moved towards Ljubomovka. Casualties are mounting which is a clear indication that you now, more than ever, need enough soldiers to achieve success.
You putting this into question is kinda laughable. Then again, you are a Russian apologist who thinks its ok for Russia to kidnap children and bomb hospitals and target civilians with terror-attacks.
@@MrCastodian when you start by spamming nazi-moskovite ideology and maskirovka, you never had any credibility to claim superiority from in the first place, vatnik.
Yes, slow advance, lots of casualties, difficulties maintaining a presence, that’s what happening.
Do that sounds familiar in this war?
You NEED that, but no one have that exact for specific frontline areas we’re Russia attack fortified cities in Donbas, but rest of the front, small forces.
There are a lot that is strange with this numbers and you refuse to really answer my questions strait up about it.
When did you se even remotely close to this amount of soldiers in Kursk, and then I mean both Ukrainian and Russian forces?
When did you se the amount of casualties you talk about, both Russian and Ukrainian?
The example you say is small attacks.
Take the start of the Kursk counter offensive, we saw at most 10 Russian AIFV and Tanks in one assault.
Ukrainian assault on Vaseloye, a few AIFV one day and a Tank the next day.
How many defender can you guess are in Vaseloye, or in some of the towns hat Russia attacking?
25-50, tops 100 and a few APC and a random Tank?
And obviously you have to end the text with some pathetic comment we’re you are attacking me as a individual, and the only thing you do by that is to put holes in you own argument, a looser mentality.
If I was supporting what you say, then fine, now I don’t, so stop making an idiot of yourself and take a discussion as an adult man.
And outing something in to question is something that everyone should do, including you, you should ent believe what is reported without factual evidence, if your a parrot for Kiev then fine, if not, demand facts and proof, question.
If Ukrainian invaded kurks with 10 thousand soldiers & were not planning to take kurks nuclear plant. That means Russia invaded Ukrainian territory with about 180 thousand soldiers. They were not planning to take the whole Ukrainian territory as well
That made no sense whatsoever
Because Putler got crap intelligence reports of pleasers. He assumed it was all a computer game : take the capital and you win. Thats why the Kjiv push failed.
True, Russians didnt expect Ukraine to hold for months. Just one kick and the building would collapse. Big mistake. Russia had to reset their whole agenda. Opening soviet stocks and shift from a failed blitzkrieg to long-term war.
@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone u must be very slow 🐌. That means Russia was not planning to take the whole Ukrainian country with 180 to 200 thousand soldiers because u can't hold a big country like Ukraine with that number of soldiers. Remember, the 180 thousand soldiers number comes from serky and international study of war, not from Russia
@@mphomosoeu6624Russia tried to take Kiev to replace the government
😂 wtf are you on about 😂
So, in ur head, do u think 🤔 that Russia was planning to take the whole country of Ukraine with that number of soldiers?
Camming ❤Russia 🇷🇺
Да что, черт тебя побери, ты несешь?))) Если цель всу продержаться как можно дольше... то какого хрена они полезли в атаку на открытой местности? А узкая низина от Суджи до Коренево, самое плохое место для обороны во всей округе. Возможно поэтому у русских там и не было практически никакой обороны. всу нужно было или окапываться на высотах вдоль своей границы... тогда они бы дольше продержались меньшими силами и с меньшими потерями... Или уж идти в атаку дальше... Полностью брать под контроль дорогу Суджа - Коренево - Рыльск... и сходу забираться на холмы. Я с самого начала полагал, что именно это всу смогут сделать... и судя по поведению всу, они и пытались сделать. Но когда провалился второй накат на Коренево, когда не смогли зайти на высоты возле Рыльска... нужно было уходить... Но девиз всу - слабоумие и отвага... они просто не в состоянии трезво оценить ситуацию и осознать, что продолжение борьбы на конкретном участке, приносит больше вреда, чем пользы и нужно уйти на более выгодные позиции. А когда решают отойти, ситуация уже безнадежная и при отходе теряют от 50 до 75% личного состава и почти всю оставшуюся технику. Хотя нужно отметить, что к тому времени, когда ситуация становится безнадежной, всу почти всегда успевают заменить штурмовые части на отряды территориальной обороны. Теперь да... русские сформировали новый фронт... и когда всу начнут отход, русские последуют за ними...
Writers tip:
dont put your text in a borg-cube square, no one likes to read such format anyway. Keep some space open once in a while when writing.
@@cz1589 знали бы Вы насколько мне безразлично, будет это кто-то читать или нет.... кто захочет, тот найдет, прочтет и поймет... только мне без разницы))) Я прихожу на такие каналы, чтобы услышать другую точку зрения и либо принять ее, либо высказать несогласие. А уж как это будет воспринято... это дело другой стороны...)
@@ВалентинПузыня ok so just lazy;-)
Happens to me as well, in some other stuff. Preserving investments for people and things that matter
@@cz1589 ленивый? можно сказать и так... просто я делаю это в перерывах рабочего дня) За чашечкой кофе и с печеньем))) Так что у меня нет цели, кому-то что-то доказать)))
@@ВалентинПузыня "So I have no goal to prove anything to anyone"
Yep - thats what we can agree on! 🙃
Russia already took Lubimovka!!!!!!
@@solidfoelife then why does Russia claim, no one else but Russia, that they made a big move around the town?
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone Fog of war! its only a matter of time before Ukraine is pushed back. Russia has already taken about 40% of Kursk back. Its too big. too many fields. no mine fields, Ukraine didn't dig trenches and fortifications. Ukraine only control farms and flat fields. Adolf and Napoleon learned from this. Now the New Fascist will learn. I study history my friend and it has not been kind to invaders of Russia. That is all!
@@solidfoelife oh, you study history? Then you know that Sweden annexed Russian territory for a century and later on the Russian army was fleeing from the Swedes for years, begging for a sieze-fire and a peace-agreement? Right? You did know that I trust 😅 Granted, the Swedish king was suffering a bit from hubris after winning every battle while being outnumbered 5 to 1 at every turn, but hey, it is what it is 😂
Oh yeah, did you know that when the Polish occupied Moscow, it was Sweden that liberated the city for Russia 😂
They took moscow in 1610 but they was destroyed a year later. It's easy to take land but to keep it is another story. Taking a little land here and there. but since the 1900 they always get their lick back and more
yes this is normal with maneuver warfare, Russians do big clumsy poorly coordinated offensives at Kursk, Ukrainians dance around them inflict as much damage on the attackers all the while also attacking their logistics , and the Russian offensive shortly stops and peters off then the Ukrainains hit the offensive thrust on the flanks and rear which forces the Russians to retreat inflicting even more heavy losses on the Russians, and the Russians do it all over again and the Ukrainians also do the same all over again. Russians simply do not ahve the logistics to conduct multiple large coordinated attacks which could cause an operational defeat and breakthrough thru Ukrainains lines in Kursk and the Donbass. Their attacks do not last too long and bog down fast and become prone to Ukrainian counterattacks. Which also makes the Russians committ more forces and result in even more losses for the Russians which taxes the Russian economy.
Wow..the Ukrainians are great. Keep on winning.
Hahahahha what happened when you wake up?😂😂😂😂
@@jelenailic4934 hahahah what happened when you woke up ???? hahahaah
@@johnwalsh4857 you are speaking like you are general and knows all about conflict and judging by your name you are English or American.Probably English and knows only what your government tell you, which means nothing.There is a word I will like to use but my comment will be censured.
@@jelenailic4934 whatever bot i dont work for any govs the war interests me and I have my contacts on both sides of the war.
OK--------. Man!!! Get a wired headset or a new Blue tooth!!!! Bye Bye!
Oh No! Not you random person online!
@@SkruffyTalez_TheWarzone just a snowflake...you must be a real man to wear this headset. Spoiled brats cant face reality and loss of comfort. It ain a perfect world - we have to learn to deal with it.