Russia Invades Ukraine 2022

[RZehr]

I see maps of Ukraine showing Russian advances and which parts of Ukraine Russia controls. It may seem like they are taking over the country pretty slowly, but I don't think it is really slowly. I think it just seems that way because Ukraine is so large.
Using thetruesize.com site, and state square mile sizes, Ukraine is pretty equal in size of PA, OH, IN, MD, DE, WV, VA, and half of Kentucky. Very similar in both square miles and population. To control an area that large is just going to take some time.

Ukraine is similar in square miles and population as Iraq. It took the US 40+ days to overwhelm Iraq in 1991. And that was considered stunningly fast. Also, the US wasn't trying to own the country, nor install a puppet. They left Saddam in charge. If they were trying to change the government, as Russia is wanting to do, it would have taken the US a lot longer, and the US would probably still be there. Oops, I guess the US is still there anyhow.

All this to say, that while I certainly believe that Russia had made incorrect assumptions about their invasion, and it is going more difficult than they figured, I don't think that their slow progress is much of a concern to Russia. They've only been at this for 16 days so far.

The bigger issue isn't the speed, it's the casualties. Reportedly the Russians have already had 3 or 4 times more combat deaths than the US experienced in 20 years of war in Afghanistan and 10 years of war in Iraq. If they are experiencing a typical 4-1 ratio of wounded to dead then there may be tens of thousands of casualties by now. They are rapidly running out of troops. The loss of equipment is also enormous. Hundreds of tanks, helicopters, aircraft, trucks, etc. By contrast, the US lost just one tank during the first gulf war and it was recovered and repaired. And in the second gulf war the US and allies only had about 100 casualties up to the point that Bush declared mission accomplished and and end to major combat operations. The casualties didn't really start until later with the insurgency and that was mostly IEDs and snipers. Russia is a highly mechanized military and the don't seem to be able to cope well with the swampy muddy terrain that is most of Ukraine this time of year once you get off the major highways. Iraq was a desert so the US could essentially drive anywhere it wanted in large armored columns with few geographic barriers.

When it was the USSR the Soviets experienced massive casualties in every military campaign and it didn't matter because they had a limitless supply of troops. I'm not sure that is still the case. For example, when they invaded Finland (a country of 5 million) in 1939 they brought an invading army of over 700,000 troops and experienced something like 150,000 dead and 200,000 wounded over a 3-month war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War They can't do that sort of thing today and Ukraine is a bigger and much more populous country that is far less geographically isolated. Ukraine can throw every last soldier and resource into this fight because it faces no other threats or enemies. Russia has potential hot spots and military defenses to maintain across all of its tens of thousands of miles of border from Finland to Korea.

You never answered why you think Russia chose to do this, instead of establishing air superiority. Are they just stupid?

I'm not Ken, but I think that Russia is trying to limit civilian casualties. I think the West is doing their best to magnify the "collateral damage". To what extent will they avoid certain operations because of civilian casualties is yet to be determined. I expect their restraint will decline as time goes on.

[temporal1]

John Mearsheimer / 22min / Ukraine-Russia 2022 Analysis



There is so much content in this 22 min., it’s enough to convince ignoring 99.99% mainstream media is best.
.01% is sufficient to get the gist of what they’re aiming for, via 24-7 non-stop repetition.

[Josh]

I agree. I hear that 30% of the world's Wheat, 20% of its corn, and 80% of its sunflower oil come from the Ukraine/Russia 'breadbasket" region. Putin's plan for a quick and rather painless week-long takeover of a Russian-welcoming Ukraine never took this into account. As this drags on, and as infrastructure is destroyed and agriculture is disrupted, the world impact become potentially HUGE!

Which is why America's sanctions make no sense. Russia has already made it clear it will be stopping food exports to non-friendly countries.

[Ken]

I see maps of Ukraine showing Russian advances and which parts of Ukraine Russia controls. It may seem like they are taking over the country pretty slowly, but I don't think it is really slowly. I think it just seems that way because Ukraine is so large.
Using thetruesize.com site, and state square mile sizes, Ukraine is pretty equal in size of PA, OH, IN, MD, DE, WV, VA, and half of Kentucky. Very similar in both square miles and population. To control an area that large is just going to take some time.

Ukraine is similar in square miles and population as Iraq. It took the US 40+ days to overwhelm Iraq in 1991. And that was considered stunningly fast. Also, the US wasn't trying to own the country, nor install a puppet. They left Saddam in charge. If they were trying to change the government, as Russia is wanting to do, it would have taken the US a lot longer, and the US would probably still be there. Oops, I guess the US is still there anyhow.

All this to say, that while I certainly believe that Russia had made incorrect assumptions about their invasion, and it is going more difficult than they figured, I don't think that their slow progress is much of a concern to Russia. They've only been at this for 16 days so far.

The bigger issue isn't the speed, it's the casualties. Reportedly the Russians have already had 3 or 4 times more combat deaths than the US experienced in 20 years of war in Afghanistan and 10 years of war in Iraq. If they are experiencing a typical 4-1 ratio of wounded to dead then there may be tens of thousands of casualties by now. They are rapidly running out of troops. The loss of equipment is also enormous. Hundreds of tanks, helicopters, aircraft, trucks, etc. By contrast, the US lost just one tank during the first gulf war and it was recovered and repaired. And in the second gulf war the US and allies only had about 100 casualties up to the point that Bush declared mission accomplished and and end to major combat operations. The casualties didn't really start until later with the insurgency and that was mostly IEDs and snipers. Russia is a highly mechanized military and the don't seem to be able to cope well with the swampy muddy terrain that is most of Ukraine this time of year once you get off the major highways. Iraq was a desert so the US could essentially drive anywhere it wanted in large armored columns with few geographic barriers.

When it was the USSR the Soviets experienced massive casualties in every military campaign and it didn't matter because they had a limitless supply of troops. I'm not sure that is still the case. For example, when they invaded Finland (a country of 5 million) in 1939 they brought an invading army of over 700,000 troops and experienced something like 150,000 dead and 200,000 wounded over a 3-month war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War They can't do that sort of thing today and Ukraine is a bigger and much more populous country that is far less geographically isolated. Ukraine can throw every last soldier and resource into this fight because it faces no other threats or enemies. Russia has potential hot spots and military defenses to maintain across all of its tens of thousands of miles of border from Finland to Korea.

You never answered why you think Russia chose to do this, instead of establishing air superiority. Are they just stupid?

I have no idea. From what I have read, it is perhaps a combination of stronger than expected Ukrainian anti-aircraft defenses, especially the low elevation handheld stuff that is mostly good against helicopters. And perhaps the Russian air force is not as good as they thought and their counter-defenses (missiles that target anti-aircraft batteries are not as good as advertised). Anti-aircraft weapons of all kinds are flowing into Ukraine from all directions. And they have the problem that the Ukrainian army is largely an infantry force with hand-held weapons so exceedingly difficult to find and attack from the air as they can just disperse and vanish and dig-in compared to conventional armored columns that are easily found and destroyed if you have air superiority.

I don't think it is for lack of trying. I see no indications that the Russians are showing any kind of restraint in this war. What they have always been good at going back to WW2 is massed artillery assaults. Basically just surrounding a town or position with guns and blasting it away until it is rubble. That is how they destroyed Berlin. And that's what they did in Chechnya and Syria and seems to be what they are now starting to do in Ukraine. It is a bloody and destructive way to fight a war, but it seems to be the Russian way.

From what I have read, it seems that this war was just really poorly planned on the part of the Russians, mainly because the military didn't really know they were actually going to war until the invasion orders were actually issued. Many of them thought they were just there for bargaining leverage and only Putin really knew that war was going to happen.

[Ken]

I agree. I hear that 30% of the world's Wheat, 20% of its corn, and 80% of its sunflower oil come from the Ukraine/Russia 'breadbasket" region. Putin's plan for a quick and rather painless week-long takeover of a Russian-welcoming Ukraine never took this into account. As this drags on, and as infrastructure is destroyed and agriculture is disrupted, the world impact become potentially HUGE!

Which is why America's sanctions make no sense. Russia has already made it clear it will be stopping food exports to non-friendly countries.

Virtually all the wheat grown in Ukraine is winter wheat so it was all planted last fall. The Ukrainian wheat harvest is typically in July and August just like in say North Dakota and Saskatchewan. So we are still 5 months away from knowing how this war will affect the wheat harvest from that region of the world. The war might still be raging, or it might be over by then. Although if the railroads and highways are all destroyed it will be difficult to get the wheat harvest to market, sanctions or no sanctions.

[temporal1]

I agree. I hear that 30% of the world's Wheat, 20% of its corn, and 80% of its sunflower oil come from the Ukraine/Russia 'breadbasket" region. Putin's plan for a quick and rather painless week-long takeover of a Russian-welcoming Ukraine never took this into account. As this drags on, and as infrastructure is destroyed and agriculture is disrupted, the world impact become potentially HUGE!

Which is why America's sanctions make no sense.
Russia has already made it clear it will be stopping food exports to non-friendly countries.

It appears to me, the entire thing from the U.S. perspective is to set up biden to be “saviour of the world;” the requirement has little to do with reality, it’s optics for a hollywood-style performance designed to win votes. “Me, Tarzan, you, Jane.”

Admittedly, it takes gall to go there. But, when gall/hubris is all you have ..

[Dan Z]

I agree. I hear that 30% of the world's Wheat, 20% of its corn, and 80% of its sunflower oil come from the Ukraine/Russia 'breadbasket" region. Putin's plan for a quick and rather painless week-long takeover of a Russian-welcoming Ukraine never took this into account. As this drags on, and as infrastructure is destroyed and agriculture is disrupted, the world impact become potentially HUGE!

Which is why America's sanctions make no sense. Russia has already made it clear it will be stopping food exports to non-friendly countries.

Part of my concern is not sanctions but functionality. Sanctions aside, with war raging and infrastructure and supply-lines decimated, how are Ukrainian farmers ever going to plant (wheat is already in), treat, harvest, and ship their products?

[Soloist]

I agree. I hear that 30% of the world's Wheat, 20% of its corn, and 80% of its sunflower oil come from the Ukraine/Russia 'breadbasket" region. Putin's plan for a quick and rather painless week-long takeover of a Russian-welcoming Ukraine never took this into account. As this drags on, and as infrastructure is destroyed and agriculture is disrupted, the world impact become potentially HUGE!

Which is why America's sanctions make no sense. Russia has already made it clear it will be stopping food exports to non-friendly countries.

Part of my concern is not sanctions but functionality. Sanctions aside, with war raging and infrastructure and supply-lines decimated, how are Ukrainian farmers ever going to plant, harvest, and ship their products?

Certainly sounds like the fields are a little tore up... how many tanks stuck in a field to ruin the harvest?

[Dan Z]

The bigger issue isn't the speed, it's the casualties. Reportedly the Russians have already had 3 or 4 times more combat deaths than the US experienced in 20 years of war in Afghanistan and 10 years of war in Iraq. If they are experiencing a typical 4-1 ratio of wounded to dead then there may be tens of thousands of casualties by now. They are rapidly running out of troops. The loss of equipment is also enormous. Hundreds of tanks, helicopters, aircraft, trucks, etc. By contrast, the US lost just one tank during the first gulf war and it was recovered and repaired. And in the second gulf war the US and allies only had about 100 casualties up to the point that Bush declared mission accomplished and and end to major combat operations. The casualties didn't really start until later with the insurgency and that was mostly IEDs and snipers. Russia is a highly mechanized military and the don't seem to be able to cope well with the swampy muddy terrain that is most of Ukraine this time of year once you get off the major highways. Iraq was a desert so the US could essentially drive anywhere it wanted in large armored columns with few geographic barriers.

When it was the USSR the Soviets experienced massive casualties in every military campaign and it didn't matter because they had a limitless supply of troops. I'm not sure that is still the case. For example, when they invaded Finland (a country of 5 million) in 1939 they brought an invading army of over 700,000 troops and experienced something like 150,000 dead and 200,000 wounded over a 3-month war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War They can't do that sort of thing today and Ukraine is a bigger and much more populous country that is far less geographically isolated. Ukraine can throw every last soldier and resource into this fight because it faces no other threats or enemies. Russia has potential hot spots and military defenses to maintain across all of its tens of thousands of miles of border from Finland to Korea.

You never answered why you think Russia chose to do this, instead of establishing air superiority. Are they just stupid?

I'm not Ken, but I think that Russia is trying to limit civilian casualties. I think the West is doing their best to magnify the "collateral damage". To what extent will they avoid certain operations because of civilian casualties is yet to be determined. I expect their restraint will decline as time goes on.

There is absolutely no virtue in what Russia is doing by traumatizing a country of 40 million people like this, but based on early reports of "collateral damage," I think Russia is probably doing a lot better than the US did during the "shock and awe" phase of the Iraq war. It all makes me sick!

[nett]

I'm not Ken, but I think that Russia is trying to limit civilian casualties. I think the West is doing their best to magnify the "collateral damage". To what extent will they avoid certain operations because of civilian casualties is yet to be determined. I expect their restraint will decline as time goes on.

I would tend to agree. But if this is the case, then the international community should be pushing for Ukraine to do what it needs to do to end the fighting, instead of basically cheering them on from the sidelines. That is, if the international community actually cares about civilians lives.

If Russia decides to go for air superiority, a lot more lives will be lost, I really hope it doesn't come to that.