Bizarre if true. I doubt it
1 Like
Iām sure they have thought about this.
It was a question I had way back when Ukraine created the buffer zone around Kharkiv. Why didnāt they enter Russia to the north, ok the terrain got better for the defender apparently but if you took it you then have the defenable terrain and a bloody good buffer. Instead they crossed the river to the east and got into a little trouble. It just didnāt seem logic to me at the time or now.
Then again they target supply routes and logistics in that context it would make some sense but you need the troops and logistics to do that. At that time they didnāt. They do now and are doing very well, in another direction.
Worth noting Russian generals would be reluctant to attack from the north there. I can not imagine Ukraine hasnāt a fair few reserves to the east (vers Kyiv) that could come into the Russian advances flank and just kill it dead.
Interesting speculation:
1 Like
Interesting discussions:
2 Likes
I donāt have an answer to your question but you raise good points. I personally (with limited knowledge) agree with a point you touch upon that the Ukraine army didnāt want to expose their Infantry/Artillery. Big losses in either/both could have been disastrous. Rather than gamble it was wiser to hold on until the big boys toys turned up. Which maybe allowed them to minimise their exposure, by taking out the Russians infrastructure/supply line.
I also believe the reasoning for the recent surge/attack was to take as much ground before the winter sets in, where the conditions are likely to hinder both sides. 
Russia has, at last count, 40 Batallion Tactical Groups in the Belgorod area. And 5-6 at Rostov. They have considerable reserves not put in combat. These could be used for an offensive or they could reinforce battlefields. I may have misunderstood @flobs, but just noting it. The north is still a threat for Ukraine.
2 Likes
Brain made of rotten Swiss cheese.
2 Likes
No I donāt feel you are misunderstanding me much. Iām no military man and I am sure the Ukrainian generals have a much better tactical knowledge than me, of course they can make mistakes however in general me querying stuff is like me doing the same to Klopp. Klopp knows best well better than me at least still doesnāt stop me commenting though. 
What seems evident to me is that Ukraineās intelligence, logistics and communications appear far superieur to Russiaās.
2 Likes
2 Likes
1 Like
1 Like
Looking at his tweets and his Wikipedia page, sounds like a full-on Putin-nuthead.
1 Like
3 Likes
Thread
3 Likes
3 Likes
Oooh, they are pissed off now 
D
3 Likes
Is it safe to say Ukraine are winning this war & Russia are finally starting to see sense?
You have to admire Zelenzsky, a proper leader standing his ground even against the highest level of evilā¦seems to be at the forefront of everything the UAF do which is unusual, for sure you wouldnāt have seen Boris or Macron or Trudeaux or even Obama/Trump back in the day doing this.
Maybe. But I would not say it is safe to say either.
1)Ukraine is on a winning trajectory though, that much is certain. But even here it can change in theory and practice. Theoretically and practically there is a low risk of use of nuclear weapons, there is a higher risk of general mobilistion in Russia (which would kill its economy but muster more than a million soldiers with time).
2 )Does Russia see sense? Depends, who makes the decisions ? It is as far as we know Putin and a couple more guys, so we donāt know.
No easy answer really. But Ukraine is on a winning trajectory and Russia would risk a LOT with mobilisation and perhaps even more if they used nukes.