Not all of the people who think Russia is winning share that view. Do you think Kazan is mistaken about Kherson staying under Russian control?
9/12/2022, 4:07:17 AM ยท 72 of 79
Gunslingr3 to Kazan
Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk and Kherson will be under Russian control and stay under Russian control at end of this.
Its hard to see how Kherson can stay under Russian control. They are cut off from supplies and reinforcements and casualty replacements. At the moment they seem to only be able to get a ferry across once in while, before it is again sunk. And all the ferry approaches are under fire also. They dont have a usable airfield there, as these are under fire.
Its worse than Dien Bien Phu. They dont have the French fleet of C-47’s that could at least parachute supplies.
That is unsustainable. And that is why there has been buzz for several days about Russians negotiating either surrender or withrawal.
Further;
What s going to need to happen to break this siege of Kherson?
Scenario 1 would be a tremendous breakthrough past the whole Ukrainian Army to the Dneiper, a crossing of the Dneiper, probably at Zaporizhzhia, and an advance along the north bank to link up. This is science fiction at this point, and moot. It requires a general Russian victory FIRST. Not in sight anytime soon no matter ones optimism.
Scenario 2 requires suppression of the HIMARS systems, which are enforcing the blockade. The Russians haven’t got a weapon system that can do that. The HIMARS is mobile, by this time numerous, and easy to conceal. These aren’t ballistic missiles (as they maneuver in flight) so counterbattery radars arent useful, and they have great range, and can “scoot” long before counterfire can arrive even if they could be located. The Russian Air Force can’t maintain a presence over Ukrainian territory for fear of SAMs, so these cant be hunted by aircraft on the spot. Long distance tactical weapons from aircraft (such as US SDB and others) suffers from the same problems as counterbattery, and Russia hasnt got such weapons anyway.
Scenario 3 requires defensive interception of HIMARS to create an umbrella over crossing points. The Russians have tried this, a lot, and have failed. HIMARS rockets are small and difficult to intercept, and Russia hasnt got anything like the Israeli “Iron Dome”. If they did have something they would be using it already. Conventional SAMs also suffer from the fundamentally bad economics of the situation. HIMARS are very cheap (as these things go), and are salvo fired anyway. SAM systems are expensive, cant fire very fast, and are easy to overwhelm with volume. And the Ukrainians are harassing the Russian radars with HARM, to add to their problems. This could be overcome if Russia can come up with an Iron Dome equivalent, and I think they could, eventually. But thats probably a matter of years.
Scenario 4, I think the most likely - Russia builds a LOT of ferries and sorties them all at once. And keeps it up, which will require creating vast engineering establishments on the spot. This is feasible, if Russia can drum up the resources and logistics, but it will result in very high casualties, on the ferries and landings, as well as among the logistics and engineering resources on the south bank. It will be a target rich environment. Even so it COULD work, but it will take many months even if the resources are available.
I dont see how the Russians can relieve Kherson anytime before they are obliged to surrender or withraw.