X Close

In Ukraine, the spring offensive could take years

Can Ukrainian troops withstand the onslaught? Credit: Getty

February 22, 2023 - 10:00am

The eighteenth-century Russian general Alexander Suvorov mused that “what is difficult in training becomes easy in battle”. Perhaps Vladimir Putin regards all that has occurred thus far in Ukraine as merely a training programme, albeit a bloody and costly one, with the war now beginning in earnest. 

Certainly the Russian President understands the crucial importance of this moment, using yesterday’s Presidential Address to describe it as “a difficult, watershed period for our country…. a time of radical, irreversible change in the entire world, of crucial historical events that will determine the future of our country and our people, a time when every one of us bears a colossal responsibility”.

Russia’s military is about to engage more intensely than it did over winter. The colder months brought a brittle stalemate, characterised by Russia’s attritional ‘human wave’ attacks. With spring heralding warmer temperatures and solid ground, Putin is, according to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, “preparing for more war, for new offensives and new attacks”. On Thursday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told the BBC that Russia’s  ‘Spring Offensive’ had begun and that “Russian attacks are already happening from several directions”.

Russia has embarked upon its offensive slowly, probing for areas of weakness. According to UK Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, this month, 3,000 Russian soldiers died during a three-day attack on the Donbas town of Vuhledar, a key logistics hub. As drafted soldiers replace Wagner mercenary forces in Russia’s ranks, the Ukrainian military has reported attacks on Bakhmut, Kharkiv, Luhansk, Kreminna and Zaporizhzhia. 

However, this is not the limit to Putin’s ambition. Ukrainian intelligence claims that Russia seeks to gain control over the entire contested Donbas region of Donetsk and Luhansk by March, further suggesting this would be achieved through a three-pronged attack from the north, east and south. Ukrainian Ambassador to Australia Vasyl Myroshnychenko said on 16th February that 300,000 Russians across multiple battlefields were already “moving in” for a large campaign from several directions.  

Russia is additionally expected to make greater use of its air capabilities. Western intelligence reports Russia massing aircraft within striking distance of Ukraine, while Ukrainian ex-colonel Serhiy Hrabsky told the New York Times that the acceleration of the offensive will involve Russian artillery barrages, bombing campaigns from ground-attack jets and sorties by helicopters, followed by tank and infantry ground assaults. 

However, the UK Ministry of Defence notes that “Russia lacks the munitions and manoeuvre units required for successful offensives”, meaning commanders make plans “requiring undermanned, inexperienced units to achieve unrealistic objectives due to political and professional pressure”. 

Russian Defence Ministry plans to add twelve new manoeuvre divisions will not be achieved until at least 2026, and Ben Wallace last week noted that an overstretched Putin has committed 97% of his soldiers to Ukraine. Putin can therefore expect a prolonged battle. Wagner mercenary boss Yevgeny Prigozhin estimates that capturing the Donbas could take “about one and a half to two more years”, while occupying all territory east of the Dnipro would “take about three years”. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) predicts that, even with “higher levels of combat power”, securing the Donbas “would take six to twelve months, if possible at all”.

Russian forces must also contend with Ukrainian counter-attacks. A likely target would be Melitopol, under Russian occupation and at the intersection of two highways and a railway line, which would help Ukraine cut Russian supply routes to Crimea. Putin’s forces have been fortifying defences along the land bridge connecting Crimea to Russia, in anticipation of attacks. 

A Ukrainian counter-offensive is not without risk. Tanks from Western countries are weeks away from arriving and Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko last week threatened to wage war alongside Russia. Yet the ISW has assessed that Russia, though “likely to make tactically and possibly even operationally significant gains”, is “very unlikely to achieve operationally decisive successes”, thus putting Ukraine “in a good position from which to conduct successful counteroffensive operations following the culmination of Russian offensives before or during the spring rainy season”.

Suvorov also remarked that “when the enemy is driven back, we have failed.  When he is cut off, encircled and dispersed, we have succeeded”. While Putin may hold similar ambitions, a lengthy battle lies ahead. 

Join the discussion


Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber


To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.

Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.

Subscribe
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

34 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Johann Strauss
JS
Johann Strauss
1 year ago

Seems to me that this piece is basically a reiteration of the US/UK narrative with very little evidence for any of the statements made (most of which probably come out of the Ukrainian side). The notion that Russian has committed 97% of its troops is just mind-blowingly off-the-charts silly.

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago

Seems to me that this piece is basically a reiteration of the US/UK narrative with very little evidence for any of the statements made (most of which probably come out of the Ukrainian side). The notion that Russian has committed 97% of its troops is just mind-blowingly off-the-charts silly.

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago

Russia has NOT committed 97% of its soldiers to the Ukraine

So is Ben Wallace a fool or a liar

Peter B
PB
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Nor has the US committed 97% of its advanced weapons systems to Ukraine. Whatever Russia comes up with can be easily trumped by US/Western weapons, training and intelligence. The fact that Russia has actually gone backwards in Ukraine over the last 9 months should be telling you something. But I doubt you’ll listen.
Do feel free to correct me with examples where you believe Russian military equipment, leadership, tactics, training, logistics and intelligence are superior to their Western equivalents.
I understand that Israel has now signed up to supply missile defence systems to Ukraine.
You will eventually realise that Russia cannot “win” this war. The only question is how long that’s going to take to sink in.

D Walsh
DW
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

So far its mainly been an artillery war, and the since the Russians have a massive advantage thats why they are winning, the US supplies the Ukraine with 11K shells a month, but the Ukraine is using 5K or 6K a day

The Ukraine seem to be running low on S300 missiles, when they run out the Western replacements are not as good or plentiful
I doubt Israel will supply the Ukraine with anything serious, from their POV they need to have a good relationship with Russia, they really don’t want Russia to sell a S400 system to Iran. do it Vlad, do it

The Ukraine remains dependent on inexperienced men and depleted munitions, sending 60 year old men off to war is cruel and wrong, dragging teenagers off the street and forcing them to fight is not right
The Russians are winning

Last edited 1 year ago by D Walsh
Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

I agree entirely. the western narrative is that Ukraine is winning, but if one looks at the actual map, it appears to me that Russia is actually winning and is well on the way to achieving their objectives.
Incidentally, there is something else I’d like to add. Namely, especially in the US and the UK there has been a lot of jingoism of the type that got us into WWI. The question I would ask all those in the West who are basically prolonging this war is what would happen if they actually had skin in the game, rather than just send weapons and allow the Ukrainians to fight and die. I suspect the US would last 3 months before cries and protest to come home erupted all over the US as the body bags piled up.

Peter B
PB
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Please remind me, what exactly are Russia’s “objectives” in this conflict ?
Are these the same as they were 1 year ago ?
How confident are you that you fully and accurately understand Putin’s current objectives ?

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

You might ask Putin the same question on a daily basis. The answers, when published might perplex many.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I’m pretty confident Putin’s objectives are unchanged although the opportunity to weaken the US and EU is now probably an added bonus.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Great. So you at least say you know them.
What are they ?
What makes you so certain that you understand them correctly ?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Great. So you at least say you know them.
What are they ?
What makes you so certain that you understand them correctly ?

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

You might ask Putin the same question on a daily basis. The answers, when published might perplex many.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I’m pretty confident Putin’s objectives are unchanged although the opportunity to weaken the US and EU is now probably an added bonus.

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Plenty of people here are already saying what the h*ll are we doing there? Why have billions gone to this corrupt former Russian territory but nothing is being done to repel the invasion at our southern boarder? The media simply refuses to report our plaints. And the money continues to be laundered right back into the off-shore bank accounts of the perps, death and destruction be damned.

Warren Trees
Warren Trees
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Imagine the fun Russian soldiers would have with capturing some trans U.S. soldiers running away in their Victoria Secret nighties, puffy slippers and wet nail polish.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Ooh, Err, MRS. For those who might remember Frankie Howerd.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  Warren Trees

Ooh, Err, MRS. For those who might remember Frankie Howerd.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Please remind me, what exactly are Russia’s “objectives” in this conflict ?
Are these the same as they were 1 year ago ?
How confident are you that you fully and accurately understand Putin’s current objectives ?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Plenty of people here are already saying what the h*ll are we doing there? Why have billions gone to this corrupt former Russian territory but nothing is being done to repel the invasion at our southern boarder? The media simply refuses to report our plaints. And the money continues to be laundered right back into the off-shore bank accounts of the perps, death and destruction be damned.

Warren Trees
WT
Warren Trees
1 year ago
Reply to  Johann Strauss

Imagine the fun Russian soldiers would have with capturing some trans U.S. soldiers running away in their Victoria Secret nighties, puffy slippers and wet nail polish.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

But where is your actual evidence that the Russians are “winning” ??? You can state this as many times as you like. But the fact is that over the last 9 months they’ve actually gone backwards. That’s a very strange sort of “winning”.
If you’re so certain that Russia is “winning”, here’s a couple of questions you should find trivial to answer:
What is your actual definition of winning ?
When will Russia finally win this war ?
Is that the same date you would have given me 1 year ago ?
You seriously think that the west doesn’t have something better than an S300 ? Where do you get your information from ? It’s just delusional.
It’s all very well to uses words like “seems” and “doubt”. But you are pitiably short on actual facts. Let’s see wat you’ve got.

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

The Soviet Union spent decades working on their air defence systems, the Russians continued the work. Most people who look into it conclude the Russian/Soviet system is better. The US are sending some patriot systems, but its clearly no where near enough, in quality or quantity

You won’t find any honest expert who disagrees

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Please answer the other questions !
What is your actual definition of winning ?
When will Russia finally win this war ?
Is that the same date you would have given me 1 year ago ?
There is absolutely no way that the US doesn’t have superior air defence systems to the S300. The fact that it isn’t all public domain information that shows up in your research means very little.
None of which explains why the Russians still do not have air superiority in Ukraine – even 1 year after invading. Given their huge advantage in air power and their understanding of the S300 system (they designed it), isn’t it rather surprising that they haven’t been able to overwhelm the Ukrainian airforce and fly at will over Ukraine ? After all, they should understand intimately all the bugs and limitations of the old S300 (one generation old now) system.
So, yet again we have this same conundrum – you insist that the Russians have superior kit and better men. And that the US missile defence systems are inferior. But they still haven’t won. How can you rationally hold both views at the same time ?

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I don’t claim that all Russian kit is superior. But I do claim that their air defence systems are better, the Serbs were able to shoot down stealth aircraft with their S300

The Ukraine if firing 2 missiles at every drone, the Russians seem to be waiting until they run out, they will have a good idea how many missile they have

The US are sending enough Patriots to maybe defend Kiev, this is not enough, the Ukraine is a huge country

I have no idea when this war will end, could be 6 months, could take years, if I knew exactly what the Russians want I could take a guess,

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

OK, so you’ve admitted that you do not know what the Russians want – i.e. you are unclear on their objectives. At least that’s something we can agree upon. Always helps to be honest about such things.
But Johann Strauss seems to know precisely what the Russian/Putin objectives are. He did clearly say so earlier in this thread. So perhaps he can now answer this rather important question and clear this up for us.
By the way, you didn’t actually say who you expect to “win” this war. “The Russians are winning” (as you claim) is not the same as “the Russians will win”.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

OK, so you’ve admitted that you do not know what the Russians want – i.e. you are unclear on their objectives. At least that’s something we can agree upon. Always helps to be honest about such things.
But Johann Strauss seems to know precisely what the Russian/Putin objectives are. He did clearly say so earlier in this thread. So perhaps he can now answer this rather important question and clear this up for us.
By the way, you didn’t actually say who you expect to “win” this war. “The Russians are winning” (as you claim) is not the same as “the Russians will win”.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Winning = achieving your objectives, which in this case are:
1. Saving the lives of Russian speaking Donbas residents – done!
2. Demilitatisation of Ukraine – with most of its military dead or wounded and now teenagers and 60 year olds being conscripted (as in Hitlers final days) and weapons running out I guess this is close right?
3. Denazification of Ukraine, ie its Azov battalion and Bandero lovers.. that too looks largely completed with the bulk of the Azov battalion wiped out in Mariupol and Zelenskyy and co criminals about to fall, that too is looking good for Putin.
It might take another 10 years but Putin has all the time in the world. He’s hugely popular and Russia is doing ok economically despite the sanctions.
How long can Ukraine last? How long before Nato/US/EU/UK get tired of it all and/or run so low in weapon supplies and cash that they walk away?

D Walsh
DW
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I don’t claim that all Russian kit is superior. But I do claim that their air defence systems are better, the Serbs were able to shoot down stealth aircraft with their S300

The Ukraine if firing 2 missiles at every drone, the Russians seem to be waiting until they run out, they will have a good idea how many missile they have

The US are sending enough Patriots to maybe defend Kiev, this is not enough, the Ukraine is a huge country

I have no idea when this war will end, could be 6 months, could take years, if I knew exactly what the Russians want I could take a guess,

Liam O'Mahony
LO
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Winning = achieving your objectives, which in this case are:
1. Saving the lives of Russian speaking Donbas residents – done!
2. Demilitatisation of Ukraine – with most of its military dead or wounded and now teenagers and 60 year olds being conscripted (as in Hitlers final days) and weapons running out I guess this is close right?
3. Denazification of Ukraine, ie its Azov battalion and Bandero lovers.. that too looks largely completed with the bulk of the Azov battalion wiped out in Mariupol and Zelenskyy and co criminals about to fall, that too is looking good for Putin.
It might take another 10 years but Putin has all the time in the world. He’s hugely popular and Russia is doing ok economically despite the sanctions.
How long can Ukraine last? How long before Nato/US/EU/UK get tired of it all and/or run so low in weapon supplies and cash that they walk away?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

The Russians don’t do “rainbow”bullsh*t, either. They train men to kill and break things, not share makeup and tucking tips.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago

What makes you think this war is about “rainbow stuff” ? I know Putin’s added this to his ever-growing whinge list/”justification” of why he had to start this war. But it’s really not about that, is it ?
Putin can make the law in Russia whatever he wants – and has frequently done so – so he really doesn’t need to worry about the “threat” of “rainbow stuff”.

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago

A Russian victory will be a big slap in the face for Globohomo

Peter B
PB
Peter B
1 year ago

What makes you think this war is about “rainbow stuff” ? I know Putin’s added this to his ever-growing whinge list/”justification” of why he had to start this war. But it’s really not about that, is it ?
Putin can make the law in Russia whatever he wants – and has frequently done so – so he really doesn’t need to worry about the “threat” of “rainbow stuff”.

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago

A Russian victory will be a big slap in the face for Globohomo

Doug Pingel
DP
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Yes, the Russians have great defence-in-Depth (Iknow because I used to listen to them) but nobody has told the Ukrainians who still manage to damage Russian bombers on the ground. Have the Russians learnt about “Dispersal” yet?

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Please answer the other questions !
What is your actual definition of winning ?
When will Russia finally win this war ?
Is that the same date you would have given me 1 year ago ?
There is absolutely no way that the US doesn’t have superior air defence systems to the S300. The fact that it isn’t all public domain information that shows up in your research means very little.
None of which explains why the Russians still do not have air superiority in Ukraine – even 1 year after invading. Given their huge advantage in air power and their understanding of the S300 system (they designed it), isn’t it rather surprising that they haven’t been able to overwhelm the Ukrainian airforce and fly at will over Ukraine ? After all, they should understand intimately all the bugs and limitations of the old S300 (one generation old now) system.
So, yet again we have this same conundrum – you insist that the Russians have superior kit and better men. And that the US missile defence systems are inferior. But they still haven’t won. How can you rationally hold both views at the same time ?

Allison Barrows
Allison Barrows
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

The Russians don’t do “rainbow”bullsh*t, either. They train men to kill and break things, not share makeup and tucking tips.

Doug Pingel
Doug Pingel
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Yes, the Russians have great defence-in-Depth (Iknow because I used to listen to them) but nobody has told the Ukrainians who still manage to damage Russian bombers on the ground. Have the Russians learnt about “Dispersal” yet?

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Do you have any counter facts on the other side? ..or are you relying on Western MSM and proven political liars? Try listening to American experts such as Ritter, McGregor, Sachs etc.. not to change your mind (a bit unlikely right?) but for a modicum of balance..

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Stop deflecting and answer the questions.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Stop deflecting and answer the questions.

D Walsh
DW
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

The Soviet Union spent decades working on their air defence systems, the Russians continued the work. Most people who look into it conclude the Russian/Soviet system is better. The US are sending some patriot systems, but its clearly no where near enough, in quality or quantity

You won’t find any honest expert who disagrees

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Do you have any counter facts on the other side? ..or are you relying on Western MSM and proven political liars? Try listening to American experts such as Ritter, McGregor, Sachs etc.. not to change your mind (a bit unlikely right?) but for a modicum of balance..

Johann Strauss
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

I agree entirely. the western narrative is that Ukraine is winning, but if one looks at the actual map, it appears to me that Russia is actually winning and is well on the way to achieving their objectives.
Incidentally, there is something else I’d like to add. Namely, especially in the US and the UK there has been a lot of jingoism of the type that got us into WWI. The question I would ask all those in the West who are basically prolonging this war is what would happen if they actually had skin in the game, rather than just send weapons and allow the Ukrainians to fight and die. I suspect the US would last 3 months before cries and protest to come home erupted all over the US as the body bags piled up.

Peter B
PB
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

But where is your actual evidence that the Russians are “winning” ??? You can state this as many times as you like. But the fact is that over the last 9 months they’ve actually gone backwards. That’s a very strange sort of “winning”.
If you’re so certain that Russia is “winning”, here’s a couple of questions you should find trivial to answer:
What is your actual definition of winning ?
When will Russia finally win this war ?
Is that the same date you would have given me 1 year ago ?
You seriously think that the west doesn’t have something better than an S300 ? Where do you get your information from ? It’s just delusional.
It’s all very well to uses words like “seems” and “doubt”. But you are pitiably short on actual facts. Let’s see wat you’ve got.

Liam O'Mahony
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

You ignore the simple and decisive fact that Russia has almost unlimited troops, vast stocks of weapons and are fighting in familiar terrain. Ukraine has lost most of its army, is running out of weapons and has a broken country unable to sustain this war. Russia will grind out a victory over the next 10 years.. meanwhile Nato will tire of this war, run out of weapon supplies and do what it did to Iraq and Afghanistan: abandon the people of Ukraine to eventual defeat and an infrastructure in utter ruins; as it focuses instead on China and Taiwan.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

How exactly do you know that “Ukraine has lost most of its army” ? It’s a bold assertion. Where’s the evidence for this though ?

Andy E
AE
Andy E
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Yeah. Five or six mobilization waves. The current wave is sweeping very young and 60-y old men. Men (boys!) of 16+ are forbidden to leave the country and must report to MP at 17.
Ukrainian Gen Zaluzny report (was it Dec or January?) leaked from the US side stating 250k+ troops loss.
(Source: NY Times and FT, so don’t even start the ‘Russian propaganda’ tune)

Andy E
Andy E
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

Yeah. Five or six mobilization waves. The current wave is sweeping very young and 60-y old men. Men (boys!) of 16+ are forbidden to leave the country and must report to MP at 17.
Ukrainian Gen Zaluzny report (was it Dec or January?) leaked from the US side stating 250k+ troops loss.
(Source: NY Times and FT, so don’t even start the ‘Russian propaganda’ tune)

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Utter twaddle. Ukraine doesn’t have a manpower problem. 750k in khaki and more available. They all want to fight. The Russian squaddie doesn’t and they thus have a manpower problem. They’ve no NCO cadre and can’t command properly at operational level. Russia munitions are rubbish and depleted. All they have is old style artillery shells, missiles that can’t pick strategic targets and accurately consistently hit them, and the ability to compel soldiers to go forward and be massacred. Russia ran from Afghanistan eventually and the Mujahideen never had Hilmers. They can never suppress Ukraine even if the West gave half the help.
Your apparent anti-americanism might be clouding your perspective

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

We left Afghanistan when we shouldn’t have …Afghanistan left the Soviet Union in pieces.
This war in Ukraine could leave Russia in bits..Brezhnev was no shrinking violet and he went in all Bertie Bigboots and was dead before that war ended, and his USSR fell apart.
History repeats itself, in this case, both times as farce.

Ted Ditchburn
TD
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  j watson

We left Afghanistan when we shouldn’t have …Afghanistan left the Soviet Union in pieces.
This war in Ukraine could leave Russia in bits..Brezhnev was no shrinking violet and he went in all Bertie Bigboots and was dead before that war ended, and his USSR fell apart.
History repeats itself, in this case, both times as farce.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

How exactly do you know that “Ukraine has lost most of its army” ? It’s a bold assertion. Where’s the evidence for this though ?

j watson
j watson
1 year ago
Reply to  Liam O'Mahony

Utter twaddle. Ukraine doesn’t have a manpower problem. 750k in khaki and more available. They all want to fight. The Russian squaddie doesn’t and they thus have a manpower problem. They’ve no NCO cadre and can’t command properly at operational level. Russia munitions are rubbish and depleted. All they have is old style artillery shells, missiles that can’t pick strategic targets and accurately consistently hit them, and the ability to compel soldiers to go forward and be massacred. Russia ran from Afghanistan eventually and the Mujahideen never had Hilmers. They can never suppress Ukraine even if the West gave half the help.
Your apparent anti-americanism might be clouding your perspective

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I came to this article a month later…this Russian spring offensive that was moving slowly seems to have moved so slowly it’s hard to know if it has moved at all. People like Mr Walsh will now reorientate and doubtless be bloviating about the summer offensive by now.

D Walsh
DW
D Walsh
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

So far its mainly been an artillery war, and the since the Russians have a massive advantage thats why they are winning, the US supplies the Ukraine with 11K shells a month, but the Ukraine is using 5K or 6K a day

The Ukraine seem to be running low on S300 missiles, when they run out the Western replacements are not as good or plentiful
I doubt Israel will supply the Ukraine with anything serious, from their POV they need to have a good relationship with Russia, they really don’t want Russia to sell a S400 system to Iran. do it Vlad, do it

The Ukraine remains dependent on inexperienced men and depleted munitions, sending 60 year old men off to war is cruel and wrong, dragging teenagers off the street and forcing them to fight is not right
The Russians are winning

Last edited 1 year ago by D Walsh
Liam O'Mahony
LO
Liam O'Mahony
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

You ignore the simple and decisive fact that Russia has almost unlimited troops, vast stocks of weapons and are fighting in familiar terrain. Ukraine has lost most of its army, is running out of weapons and has a broken country unable to sustain this war. Russia will grind out a victory over the next 10 years.. meanwhile Nato will tire of this war, run out of weapon supplies and do what it did to Iraq and Afghanistan: abandon the people of Ukraine to eventual defeat and an infrastructure in utter ruins; as it focuses instead on China and Taiwan.

Ted Ditchburn
Ted Ditchburn
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter B

I came to this article a month later…this Russian spring offensive that was moving slowly seems to have moved so slowly it’s hard to know if it has moved at all. People like Mr Walsh will now reorientate and doubtless be bloviating about the summer offensive by now.

Peter B
Peter B
1 year ago
Reply to  D Walsh

Nor has the US committed 97% of its advanced weapons systems to Ukraine. Whatever Russia comes up with can be easily trumped by US/Western weapons, training and intelligence. The fact that Russia has actually gone backwards in Ukraine over the last 9 months should be telling you something. But I doubt you’ll listen.
Do feel free to correct me with examples where you believe Russian military equipment, leadership, tactics, training, logistics and intelligence are superior to their Western equivalents.
I understand that Israel has now signed up to supply missile defence systems to Ukraine.
You will eventually realise that Russia cannot “win” this war. The only question is how long that’s going to take to sink in.

D Walsh
D Walsh
1 year ago

Russia has NOT committed 97% of its soldiers to the Ukraine

So is Ben Wallace a fool or a liar

Andy E
Andy E
1 year ago

I wonder. What is less dangerous — to have a moron like Ben Wallace as a friend or as a foe?

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy E
Andy E
Andy E
1 year ago

I wonder. What is less dangerous — to have a moron like Ben Wallace as a friend or as a foe?

Last edited 1 year ago by Andy E
Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
1 year ago

Crikey! What a mob so many of blow-hards, know-alls and armchair generals venting their prejudices and preconceptions. People are dying there, people! Lives are being wrecked. It’s not a board game.

Paul Hemphill
Paul Hemphill
1 year ago

Crikey! What a mob so many of blow-hards, know-alls and armchair generals venting their prejudices and preconceptions. People are dying there, people! Lives are being wrecked. It’s not a board game.

Malvin Marombedza
Malvin Marombedza
1 year ago

I do sincerely fear that Russia will win this war. It will be bloody, yes, but they will most likely seize the Donbas and Luhansk. I seriously doubt that the West has the caliber of Leaders who have the stomach needed to effectively back Ukraine all the way. Getting tanks to Ukraine, just plain tanks, was a squabble. Fighter jets are already “off the table”, for now at least. Why not just go all in, for Christ’s sake? What’s will all the indecision? Either they are with Ukraine or not. This whole thing of “trying not to escalate” just sounds like sophisticated appeasement to me.

Andy E
Andy E
1 year ago

“All in” will surely get to the global war and BTW destruction of the city you live in. Global economical chaos and death of millions. Don’t you think [some] Russians don’t want “all in”? They do. Like “nuke them, we had enough of humiliation and sanctions”. Google translate some Russian sources, it’s a lot of rage and hate from their side as well. How about just one line I saw the other day:
“A Jew being a servant to Anglo-Saxons is keeping the war going to have Slavs killing other Slavs”. How is that, huh?

Andy E
Andy E
1 year ago

“All in” will surely get to the global war and BTW destruction of the city you live in. Global economical chaos and death of millions. Don’t you think [some] Russians don’t want “all in”? They do. Like “nuke them, we had enough of humiliation and sanctions”. Google translate some Russian sources, it’s a lot of rage and hate from their side as well. How about just one line I saw the other day:
“A Jew being a servant to Anglo-Saxons is keeping the war going to have Slavs killing other Slavs”. How is that, huh?

Malvin Marombedza
Malvin Marombedza
1 year ago

I do sincerely fear that Russia will win this war. It will be bloody, yes, but they will most likely seize the Donbas and Luhansk. I seriously doubt that the West has the caliber of Leaders who have the stomach needed to effectively back Ukraine all the way. Getting tanks to Ukraine, just plain tanks, was a squabble. Fighter jets are already “off the table”, for now at least. Why not just go all in, for Christ’s sake? What’s will all the indecision? Either they are with Ukraine or not. This whole thing of “trying not to escalate” just sounds like sophisticated appeasement to me.