Posted on 08/24/2023 9:46:43 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
For Ukraine’s Independence Day celebration, Volodymyr Zelensky brought some real fireworks right to the heart of Russia’s occupation. Officials in Kyiv announced this morning that they have landed forces on the western shores of Crimea, raised the Ukranian flag, and have engaged and destroyed Russian forces near two settlements.
No word yet from Russia, but this would be bad news indeed for Vladimir Putin if this beachhead succeeds. If it is a beachhead, that is:
Special forces landed on the western shore of Crimea, near the settlements of Olenivka and Mayak, in a joint operation with the country’s Navy, according to Ukrainian Defense Intelligence.
“While performing the task, Ukrainian defenders clashed with the occupier’s units. As a result, the enemy suffered losses among its personnel and destroyed enemy equipment,” the intelligence agency said.
While they were there, the Ukrainian unit also raised the national flag, it added.
Russia hasn’t commented yet, but their milblogger and nationalist community claims that this was just a sabotage mission. They claim that the Ukrainians staged a raid and then fled under fire in the direction of Odesa. Another source in the Donetsk People’s Republic (the pro-Russia government recognized by Putin) claims to have destroyed the beachhead and “liquidated” 15-20 people. How this information came to Donetsk from the western shore of Crimea has not yet been explained.
CNN calls this “one of the most daring moves yet,” which it certainly would be, as well as one of its riskiest, assuming it is more than a raid. The lines of communication to the western shore of Crimea are aspirational more than solid; Russia still has a Black Sea navy that could easily cut it off. If Ukraine means this seriously as a move on Crimea, it would force Ukraine to shift its counteroffensive efforts to the Kherson theater and move west to relieve pressure on a beachhead on the shore. That is, unless the point of this landing is a feint to get Russian troops committed away from a renewed effort to push east from Kherson to squeeze Russia out of the Donbass.
So far, it’s tough to tell exactly what the Ukrainians have in mind with this move. Indeed, it’s not clear yet whether this is even intended for a sustained mission. The BBC report from Kyiv makes it sound more like an Independence Day thumb in the eye to Russia, and a momentary humiliation for Putin:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky released an Independence Day message on X, formerly known as Twitter, rallying his countrymen to help maintain the country’s independence.
“In this fight, everyone counts. Because the fight is for something that is important to everyone,” Mr Zelensky said.
Independence Day has gained increased significance among Ukrainians since Russia’s invasion started in February 2022, according to a poll by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology. It is now the country’s third most important holiday, behind only Easter and Christmas.
The point of this may be just to demonstrate Zelensky’s intent to restore Ukraine’s full pre-2014 sovereignty, full stop, and to raise morale by conducting a raid of opportunity where the Russians might be caught napping. That would be a morale booster for Ukrainians, and those do matter in long, protracted wars. (Consider the value of Doolittle’s raid on Tokyo, which was much more about domestic morale after Pearl Harbor than actual military advances.) A raid might also force Russia to shift its stretched resources to cover more attacks in Crimea — although one might expect Russia to hold off unless more troops land on either side of the peninsula.
Still, Ukraine has begun talking about the post-liberation plan for Crimea already. They clearly want to make sure everyone knows that the push is coming soon, even if it might not be today:
Crimea as Europe’s new tourist hub. The government aims to transform the peninsula into a year-round resort, positioning it as a destination for leisure and recreation. The plan involves the creation of new hotel infrastructure and public spaces under the “Crimea365” brand.
Uniting Crimea with Ukraine, Europe and the world. Integrating the peninsula into the European transportation network TEN-T. The plan includes the construction of four highways, two international-level airports, as well as dismantling of the Crimean Bridge for safe navigation in the Black and Azov seas.
Power industry. Integrating Crimea into the ENTSO-E energy system and promoting renewable energy sources. Plans involve developing the Black Sea gas shelf using cutting-edge technologies, with the government envisioning Crimea as a net energy exporter.
ISW’s latest assessment, prior to the landing, provides some evidence that Ukraine was serious enough about this operation to make strategic attacks just beforehand. Even without the context of an apparently successful landing on the beach, ISW noted that the success of the precursor attack had something to say about Russian operational competency, none of it good:
Ukrainian forces likely struck a Russian S-400 air defense system in Crimea on August 23. The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) announced and posted footage of a strike on a Russian S-400 long and medium-range anti-aircraft missile system near Olenivka, Crimea (116km northwest of Sevastopol and about 140km south of Kherson City).[48] GUR reported that the strike destroyed an air defense installation, an unspecified number of missiles, and killed nearby Russian military personnel, though the footage only shows part of the installation exploding.[49] A Kremlin-affiliated Russian milblogger suggested that Ukrainian forces likely used a Harpoon, Neptune, or Brimstone II missile to strike the air defense system.[50] Russian milbloggers expressed concern that Ukrainian forces were able to operate a drone and record footage of the strike roughly 120km behind the current frontline.[51] A Ukrainian strike on a Russian air defense installation deep within the Russian rear indicates a number of Russian tactical failures, particularly that Russian forces were seemingly unprepared to intercept the missiles with the air defense system or operate electronic warfare jamming to prevent Ukrainian forces from operating a drone in the area. These tactical failures, though surprising and serious, may not be indicative of wider systemic issues within Russian air defenses, however.
How do you think they feel about it now, even if all the landing turns out to be is a hit-and-run raid? These kinds of operations are not just morale-impacters for Ukraine, after all.
Macgregor is far more ethical, accurate and unbiased than the Ukrainian grifter Denys Davydov, who is quite literally, for sale.
It’s the same old theme
Since nineteen-seventeen
In your head, in your head
They’re still fightin’
With their tanks and their bombs
And their bombs and their guns
In your head, in your head
They are dyin’
In your head, in your head
Zombie, zombie, zombie, hey, hey
What’s in your head, in your head
Zombie, zombie, zombie, hey, hey, hey
________
Lots of war documentaries on TV: Napoleon, Crimean War, WWI, Russian Civil War, WWII.
This all seems like another dreary rerun or reboot.
It is amusing to watch the subtle yet ongoing shift in the "narrative." The game reminds of Clinton's "it depends on what the meaning 'is' is."
"Gen. Milley on if Ukraine can win: Define ‘win’," Washignton Post, 18 August 2023.
"On if Ukraine can win""Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/18/gen-milley-ukraine-tuberville-wokeness/“That depends on what you mean by the word ‘win.’”
“For Ukraine, this is an existential fight. It's a fight for survival. But for the rest of Europe and for the rest of the world, really, for the United States, it's about those rules, to make sure those rules stay in place. What Putin has done is a frontal assault on those rules of the international order that have been in existence now for eight decades since the end of World War II.
"If the end state is Ukraine is a free, independent sovereign country with its territory intact, that will take a considerable level of effort yet to come. And this is a long, very difficult, high casualty-producing war that's ongoing. You can achieve those objectives through military means. That's gonna take a long, long time, but you can also achieve those objectives maybe possibly, through some sort of diplomatic means.”
So, "a frontal assault on those rules of the international order" is not only now a still "unofficial" war between non-NATO Ukraine and non-NATO Russia, with proxies a plenty emptying their economies of waeth and materiel, but it is also an event which has brought BRICS+ into being, dismissed by some and hailed by others, alongside the fact that SWIFT and the BIC will not be the only game in town, and Biden-Blinken-Nuland the only diplomacy to be reckoned with as time goes by.
Define what winning is.
Define what losing is.
Apparently, "it depends on what the meaning is 'is' is."
But Milley, while not leading NATO into a still-not-NATO land war with Russia on behalf of non-NATO Ukraine says, "this is a long, very difficult, high casualty-producing war."
Hurrah for war, "but you can also achieve those objectives maybe possibly, through some sort of diplomatic means."
The narrative shifts day by day.
Crimea is Russia.
They’re fighting Red China ?
Bingo. Way too many globalist spambots and paid trolls pushing that degenerate warmongering agenda on FR. They should’ve been tossed off here a year ago.
Pipe down, pipsqueak.
So, to say this was meaningless gesture is an understatement.
Crimea nor any of the annexed regions will ever be part of Ukraine again. Nor do those that live there want to be part of Ukraine again.
And your response?
They’re fighting Red China ?
Are you disputing that the Soviet Union was once our preeminent geostrategic foe? Are you denying that Putin's Russia still has an arsenal of weapons aimed at America?
Your comment makes no sense!
Regards,
The Soviet Union collapsed 32 years ago. You’re still fighting that war.
Red China is our enemy, not Russia. Russia should be our ally, but the corrupt warmongering installed globalist regime in D.C. is doing everything it can to provoke them. Fact is, we have no business butting into this civil war between Russia and the Ukraine. If you feel so strongly about “defeating” the pro-Christian/anti-globalist/anti-Sodomarchy Russia, you can leave for the Ukraine today and go sign up to fight in their army to preserve the child sex trafficking oligarchs power there.
An interesting conflation of geopolitical names. Soviet Union. Russia.
When the Soviet Union, a 'preeminent geostrategic foe' existed, Ukraine was a part of it. The war in Ukraine with Russia tells that Ukraine, for a time a part of the Soviet Union, is not part of Russia today. Or in part, on whatever side one supports.
As to, "are you denying that Putin's Russia still has an arsenal of weapons aimed at America?" I for one do not deny it. Nor do I deny that we have an arsenal of weapons aimed at Russia (and other foes too).
Were you and I to be facing one another with semiautomatic weapons to back up a heated disagreement, it is assured we would both get "itchy trigger fingers" or both lower our weapons, all the while expecting a possible trick. People are suspicious of people, after all.
So the second question is distinct from the first. The second is a key issue today. As with the notion of "mutually-assured destruction," and from the standoff between Kennedy and Khrushchev so long ago, MAD still functions. This is that classic Mexican standoff."
As Wiki conveniently summarizes, "A Mexican standoff is a confrontation where no strategy exists that allows any party to achieve victory. Any party initiating aggression might trigger their own demise. At the same time, the parties are unable to extract themselves from the situation without suffering a loss. As a result, all participants need to maintain the strategic tension, which remains unresolved until some outside event or interparty dialogue makes it possible to resolve it.Threatening America's heartland and threatening Russia's -- or Europe's or China's -- heartland is that standoff. And, as above, "all participants need to maintain the strategic tension, which remains unresolved until...."
And this is where you have the chance to offer your strategy for diffusing the standoff. Have you one to declare?
Regards.
I have referred to the Soviet Union only because the Russian Federation is the declared successor-state of the U.S.S.R., and because Putin's Russia now displays the same predisposition to Imperialism - incl. the intimidation of its neighbors, grabbing land, etc.
Red China is our enemy, not Russia.
Both Red China and Putin's Russia are military threats to the U.S.
Putin has a stockpile of nuclear weapons many times greater than Red China's, and most of Russia's nukes are pointed at America. Red China is flexing its muscles in the South China Sea, continuing to threaten Taiwan, etc. They each represent different kinds of threats (in quality and magnitude) to America, and I am by no means trying to understate the danger China poses to America's interests and security. But focusing solely upon Red China and ignoring the aggressive posture adopted by Putin's Russia - as you are attempting to argue - is unwarranted.
Russia should be our ally
And it should rain sprinkled doughnuts - but it doesn't.
We will win no worthy friends in Moscow by ignoring that the current regime there has disavowed the post-WWII security order, is attacking or threatening to attack multiple neighbors, and cannot be a credible partner until Putin is deposed. And until Putin is swept away, we will have to be satisfied with a constant erosion and degradation of the military threat potential of Putin's land forces.
Fact is, we have no business butting into this civil war between Russia and the Ukraine.
That is an entirely ingenuous and factually untrue characterization of the invasion - in breach of all principles of international law - by a foreign power of a neighboring sovereign nation.
Regards,
I am not "conflating" anything.
The fact that the Soviet Union was dissolved and that, subsequently, the Russian Federation voluntarily chose to assume the mantle of "successor-state" to the U.S.S.R. - with all that that entails - is something that I cannot be held accountable for.
Further, to all appearances, Putin is attempting to reestablish something like a resurrected U.S.S.R. in its old borders.
When the Soviet Union, a 'preeminent geostrategic foe' existed, Ukraine was a part of it. The war in Ukraine with Russia tells that Ukraine, for a time a part of the Soviet Union, is not part of Russia today.
The fact that Ukraine was once a part of the U.S.S.R. is now largely irrelevant / an historical curiosity. After the dissolution of the U.S.S.R., Ukraine wanted nothing more to do with its tainted political and historical legacy. Instead, Ukraine voluntarily surrendered its nuclear weapons (based in part on security assurances provided by the West).
Re. "Mexican Stand-Off": It is cheap to argue that, because of MAD, the West must accept any non-nuclear outrage perpetrated by our nuclear-armed foes, make any concessions they demand. That is nothing more than the old "Better Red than Dead" argument that held sway among the Left here in Central Europe during the days of the NATO Double-Track Decision.
Regards,
"And this is where you have the chance to offer your strategy for diffusing the standoff. Have you one to declare?"As best I went through your response, you have no strategy of your own to declare.
If you have a strategy going forward, I would look forward to reading it.
Have you a strategy to offer?
Why do you keep talking to yourself Field marshal Zhukov? It is interesting that you call yourself pipsqueak
It is called rationalization. Remember the disastrous exit from Afghanistan was described as a “success.”
“War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength”
“The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.”
I endeavor, always, to address every substantive point raised in a posting to which I respond.
In the case of your question, it contains an implied (concealed) premise/assumption that I am not willing to co-sign: Namely, that a "stand-off" is something attainable, or even desirable. Also: That anyone but the directly-involved combatants - and specifically, the aggrieved party of the invaded country - can conclude that a stand-off is now imperative.
The Collective West is supplying financial aid, training, supplies, and arms - but does not have the moral standing to impose terms upon Ukraine and/or demand that she strive for a "stand-off" (however you define it); we could, at most, threaten to withdraw our aid.
So: The onus is upon you to first explain why any such ill-defined "stand-off" should be sought by Ukraine. Specifically, you should explain why such a course of action would be preferable to any other conceivable alternative (such as continuing to fight until, e.g., the Russian people grow war-weary, Putin is assassinated or deposed, Russia breaks up, Belarus switches sides, etc.).
If, by "stand-off," you mean "cessation of hostilities," then I would propose that Ukraine continue defeating Russia on the battlefield until Russia gives up, confesses her culpability, and makes amends to Ukraine (war reparations).
Contrariwise: The worst strategy going forward would be for Ukraine to make territorial concessions to Russia. That would practically guarantee a repeat of the Russian invasion at some time in the near future.
Regards,
Meant to write "demand that she strive for a diffusing of the stand-off" - also elsewhere in similar formulations elsewhere in my response.
Regards,
Nope. Long story short. You stated what you wanted to say.
"I would propose that Ukraine continue defeating Russia on the battlefield until Russia gives up, confesses her culpability, and makes amends to Ukraine (war reparations)."So all the West need do is wait for Ukraine to defeat Russia on the battlefield.
Okay. I'm fine with that. Let them fight.
A small problem could arise, if Ukraine does not defeat Russia. We might well be discussing / debating this over time. Time will tell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.