Ukraine in 'First World War-like' battle for Bakhmut as it races Russia for arms

The National ^ | Jan 31, 2023

[MinorityRepublican]

Ukraine and Russia are fighting a "First World War-like" battle for the city of Bakhmut as casualties pile up on both sides, western officials have said.

But Britain said on Tuesday it was "not practical" to supply fighter jets despite the assessment of western analysts that the war is entering a stalemate.

Ukraine is pushing Nato members to supply their jets after US President Joe Biden ruled out sending F-16s.

Kyiv and Moscow are believed to be planning spring offensives as the war's anniversary approaches.

The eastern city of Bakhmut has been the site of heavy fighting as Ukraine awaits the arrival of western tanks.

"Both sides are suffering really heavy casualties, particularly around Bakhmut. It’s a devastating, First World War-like operating environment," one western official said.

The official said the race was on for which side could maintain its supply of weapons and build up its offensive capability.

"Even though on paper the Russians have greater mass, what we’ve seen is that they haven’t been able to employ that successfully on the battlefield," they said.

"The Ukrainians have an advantage from superior western military equipment that’s being provided.

"There’s some poor decision-making on the Russian side and there’s some pretty agile thinking happening on the Ukrainian side.

[tlozo]

U.S. is combing the world to scrounge tanks, artillery and ammunition to send there.

Reality check, US has 3,500 Abrams tanks in storage, 2,000 Bradleys in storage, has not sent any GLSDB or ATACM longer range missiles. .

[buwaya]

It turned out that in WWI the key to the trench problem turned out to be technology and combined arms, not attrition and endless bombardment. And this broke open the front, and restored maneuver warfare.

[frithguild]

Ukraine and Russia are fighting a "First World War-like" battle for the city of Bakhmut as casualties pile up on both sides, western officials have said.

It should be obvious that this is not journalism. It is stenography for the DOD/State/CIA that leverages the reputation of the publisher. Propaganda 101.

What is interesting is how the DOD/State/CIA messaging theme has changed over the past 3-4 weeks. It no longer transmits the inevitability of an AFU victory and success in a shortly arriving offensive. The key thematic image now is WW1.

The response anticipated from the recipient is to calculate the chances of success for the "in-group" (Dopamine then oxytocin mediation). This change represents the abandonment of conditioning the recipient to accept the cost of securing a victory. It conditions to accept a long escalating conflict and the avoidance of a dubious peace process that the in-group will most intelligently navigate past.

The thematic message will continue to shift, IMHO. US policy toward Russia dictated by DOD/State/CIA since 2004 at minimum and flowering in 2014 has been the most egregious and malicious miscalculation in the history of diplomacy. DOD/State/CIA became filled during this general period of time with the products of post modern higher education. These products believe in the success of a scheme that fits their favored narrative because, to quote a former President at the root of this colossal failure, history arcs in our favor. This is Dunning-Kruger governance before our very eyes. Lightning bolts and electric chairs arc. Not history.

[buwaya]

Airframes “mean less” in this war, because the Russians have proven incapable of conducting SEAD - Suppression of Enemy Air Defense. Thats why they cant overfly Ukrainian airspace. Those S300’s are still there, and Russia has no solution to that, old as it is.

The US however is all about SEAD.

[bert]

Amen....

The Russian trenches are under observation so effective that grenades can be effectively dropped on only one hapless Russian. There are videos of the grenades being dropped into an open armored vehicle hatch.

The drones are cheap and ubiquitous.. Every artillery gun crew can have it’s own drone to find a target, set coordinates and then actually watch the shell as it hits.

The author writing about WW I and trenches has no clue.

Apparently the Russian’s have observation drones but not the associated grenades/bombs and kill capability. We have learned that the Russians communicate by cell phone because if they get on the radio, they get killed. Now days, the cell phone traffic of soldiers phoning home is monitored effectively. They live in constant fear of Ukarnian drones

[silverleaf]

Tell us how much damage the Ukrainian Air Force is doing to the Russian ground offensive….

[buwaya]

None.
The UkAF has the same deal as the RuAF, only worse.
But the USAF is not the Russians or the Ukrainians.

Just a reminder -
This whole thread is about that “what if” scenario of NATO getting attacked.

[buwaya]

To be clear, the Russians also do have grenade drones.
Its hard to say whether one side has more than the other.

They may have proportionately fewer artillery drones than the Ukrainians, but thats not clear.

[silverleaf]

Good generals think about strategy. Great generals think about logistics.

The Russians have the obvious past present and future logistics advantage in this war. It’s their border. As noted above, the Western narrative toward floating settlement scenarios is shifting subtly … faster than the depletion of NATO and US battle-ready and battle-appropriate weapons but slower than the daily slaughter of hundreds of Ukrainians who have lost their Air Force, their Navy, and the equivalent of 2 Armies, while consuming US Aid greater than almost double the entire Russian defense budget? You wonder why the delivery of Abrams Western tanks and most of those Leopards keeps getting pushed into the hazy future? You really think the US can equip and move 150,000 troops INTO UKRAINE or that the Poles would commit 200,000 battle troops for anything other than annexation of Galacia?

https://www.csis.org/analysis/rebuilding-us-inventories-six-critical-systems

[buwaya]

I dont think US troops, or Poles, are going anywhere unless the Russians go insane.

And yes, the US can move that many, and more, into Ukraine if it had to. It did WAY more over worse infrastructure in 1991, and 2003.

Among other things there are two big ports right there, Odessa and Mykolaiev, and more small ones. And the US can secure them.

As for those projections,

A. They are seriously off. It doesnt take into account current stocks, purchase or supply from other manufacturers (Korea, Poland, the rest of Europe, etc), plus US and third parties capacity increases. And neither does it include the neat GLSDB hack, which should result in @20-40K HIMARS rounds. As for HIMARS vehicles, there are @500 in US inventory, plus nearly 1,000 M270. Most of which are in reserve. And Stinger is by now not very relevant, its old tech. The Euros own that space now with Piorun and etc. The US too has ordered Piorun.

B. If you are talking of a war with NATO the whole model here goes away. The mass bombardment paradigm becomes irrelevant, as that is just a consequence of the incapacity of both sides, its what they are reduced to, 1917 but dumber. A whole new set of weapons comes into play, from the Air, but not just that, wiping the Russian artillery off the table. No more mass bombardments, more “road of death”.

[sarge83]

This may very well be the case but I question it’s veracity.

This sounds like CIA/BiteMe propaganda, just as big a load of horse crap as the Russian pap.