Bakhmut apparently has fallen

[DarkHunter]

2 hours ago, Electric Scooter said:

I can understand Russia using its old stuff when its opponent has very few tanks of its own to counter them.

The Leopard tanks gifted by Poland to Ukraine are first generation ones. As in, quite old and outdated. They were originally gifted to Poland by Germany to clear out some of its old mothballed stuff. It has also only been given enough tanks in total for one small tank battalion which is not going to have an significant impact on the conflict. It would need a huge tank surge to make any real impact because Russia soldiers do have RPGs and plenty of tanks of their own.

The Russians have a huge and fully capable air force. Yes, most of it isn`t being used and hasn`t been used at any point in the conflict. I think you need to be careful of negative idealisation of the Russian military. There is a lot of propaganda going around about how great Ukraine is and how bad Russia is, and wishful thinking without actual evidence to back it up.

I did some research the other day because it didn`t seem right to me that a country like Russia would have microchip shortages for its military. Why? Well, what type of military buys in chips for its forces? No one really knows whats in a chip so using overseas manufactured ones puts all assets using them at risk. What I found is the Russian military industrial complex like many other countries has its own chip manufacturer for its armed forces.

Except one counter attack when Russia left its right flank poorly manned, the conflict hasn`t gone the way that would suggest Ukraine is strong. It looks to me like they have worked with NATO and gained enough NATO equipment, training, and real-time intelligence, to only be able to stabilise their front line. And we have yet to hear how many men it has cost them to do that from a neutral qualified source.

What complete and utter garbage coming from you yet again.

Russia has lost at minimum approximately 1,982 tanks of which 19 were T-90M (Russia only had 67 T-90M tanks before invading Ukraine), 35 were T-90A (Russia only had 350 active with 200 in reserve), 81 were T-80BVM (Russia only had 170), 395 were T-80BV/T-80U variants (Russia had 310 T-80BV/T-80U active before invading Ukraine and if factoring in the T-80B model then 3,000 in reserve), 204 T-72B3M (Russia had 840 before the war started), 309 T-72B3 (Russia had 850 before invading Ukraine), and 434 T-72B/T-72BA (Russia had 650 active before the war and adding in T-72A and T-72 variants then 7,000 in storage).  The storage numbers are not a good estimate of strength as a large number of stored tanks can not be repaired and sent into combat.  Also to restate this important fact the Russian losses are the lower estimate and actual Russian losses are higher.

Focusing only on known active tanks before Russia invaded Ukraine, for a lower estimate, Russia has lost approximately 45% of its active tank force which has it's most modern and best tanks along with the corresponding crews.

Before the war Ukraine had approximately 720 T-64BV/T-64BM in service with 578 T-64 variants in storage (Ukraine has lost 302 T-64BV/T-64BM), approximately 100 T-80BV in service (Ukraine has lost 39), and 6 T-84 in service of which none have been confirmed as lost.  Ukraine has captured a number of Russian tanks which include 2 captured T-90M, 13 captured T-90A, 32 captured T-80BVM, 49 captured T-80U, 80 captured T-80BV, 105 captured T-72B3M, 83 captured T-72B3, 105 captured T-72B/T-72BA, and other older model Russian tanks captured.  

Ukraine has lost 341 tanks and captured 469 Russian tank models that are in active service of the Russian military, in total Ukraine has captured 542 Russian tanks.

Ukraine has been given approximately 575 tanks, most T-72 variants, with approximately a further 200 waiting to be delivered to Ukraine.  Of the tanks that arent a T-72 variant there are 30 Leopard 2A4, 24 Leopard 2A6, and 14 Challenger 2 tanks.  A further 29 Leopard 2A4, 10 Strv 122 (Leopard 2 variant), 31 Abrams, another 14 Challenger 2 tanks, and 130+ Leopard 1 variants are to be delivered to Ukraine.

Ultimately in terms of tanks the Ukranian military has at minimum essentially achieved parity with Russia with a good chance of having the advantage over Russia.

The rest of your post is still garbage but that took longer then I expected to type out.

Also as of today who controls Mykolaiv, Odessa, and Kherson

Edited May 25 by DarkHunter

[DarkHunter]

11 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

This is no longer a MBT war, it’s an artillery battle. Tanks won’t help Ukraine anymore than it did Russia. 
 

Tanks are a small component of an attacking force anyway. Russia is producing over 100 T90’s a month. They have nothing to fear from the Leopards and Challengers.

Russia has over 900 fighters and less than 70 are allocated to the war in Ukraine. F-16’s will help Ukraine deliver smart ordnance but they won’t be able to challenge Russian fighters flying in Russian airspace.

Basically Ukraine is fighting with American money. They will do as told

More claims, really garbage, with absolutely no sourcing.

Where is your source that Russia is building 100 T-90 tanks a month.

Russia currently only has one operational tank factory and for a long time it stopped production entirely, now it's making about 20 tanks a month.  Other facilities are able to refurbish old tanks, normally T-62 and T-54/T-55 tanks.  

At absolute best with a mix of new tanks and refurbished old tanks Russia might be able to achieve 90 tanks a month.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/russia-just-one-tank-factory-122420611.html

https://en.defence-ua.com/industries/how_many_tanks_a_month_russian_uralvagonzavod_can_produce_really-5921.html

Those are sources, which you never provide probably cause the only sources you use are Russian propaganda.

[Occult1]

Ukraine war: Wagner says Bakhmut transfer to Russian army under way

The head of Russia's Wagner mercenary group has announced that its forces have started withdrawing from the Ukrainian city of Bakhmut.

''Yevgeny Prigozhin has vowed to transfer control of the city to the Russian army by 1 June, but Kyiv says it still controls pockets of the city.

He said his forces were ready to return if the Russian regular army proved unable to manage the situation.

The battle for the city has been the longest and bloodiest of the war.''

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65705733

[Buzz_Light_Year]

27 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

He said his forces were ready to return if the Russian regular army proved unable to manage the situation.

Well that means that there isn't any real reason to leave.

[Electric Scooter]

7 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

What complete and utter garbage coming from you yet again.

Russia has lost at minimum approximately 1,982 tanks of which 19 were T-90M (Russia only had 67 T-90M tanks before invading Ukraine), 35 were T-90A (Russia only had 350 active with 200 in reserve), 81 were T-80BVM (Russia only had 170), 395 were T-80BV/T-80U variants (Russia had 310 T-80BV/T-80U active before invading Ukraine and if factoring in the T-80B model then 3,000 in reserve), 204 T-72B3M (Russia had 840 before the war started), 309 T-72B3 (Russia had 850 before invading Ukraine), and 434 T-72B/T-72BA (Russia had 650 active before the war and adding in T-72A and T-72 variants then 7,000 in storage).  The storage numbers are not a good estimate of strength as a large number of stored tanks can not be repaired and sent into combat.  Also to restate this important fact the Russian losses are the lower estimate and actual Russian losses are higher.

Focusing only on known active tanks before Russia invaded Ukraine, for a lower estimate, Russia has lost approximately 45% of its active tank force which has it's most modern and best tanks along with the corresponding crews.

Before the war Ukraine had approximately 720 T-64BV/T-64BM in service with 578 T-64 variants in storage (Ukraine has lost 302 T-64BV/T-64BM), approximately 100 T-80BV in service (Ukraine has lost 39), and 6 T-84 in service of which none have been confirmed as lost.  Ukraine has captured a number of Russian tanks which include 2 captured T-90M, 13 captured T-90A, 32 captured T-80BVM, 49 captured T-80U, 80 captured T-80BV, 105 captured T-72B3M, 83 captured T-72B3, 105 captured T-72B/T-72BA, and other older model Russian tanks captured.  

Ukraine has lost 341 tanks and captured 469 Russian tank models that are in active service of the Russian military, in total Ukraine has captured 542 Russian tanks.

Ukraine has been given approximately 575 tanks, most T-72 variants, with approximately a further 200 waiting to be delivered to Ukraine.  Of the tanks that arent a T-72 variant there are 30 Leopard 2A4, 24 Leopard 2A6, and 14 Challenger 2 tanks.  A further 29 Leopard 2A4, 10 Strv 122 (Leopard 2 variant), 31 Abrams, another 14 Challenger 2 tanks, and 130+ Leopard 1 variants are to be delivered to Ukraine.

Ultimately in terms of tanks the Ukranian military has at minimum essentially achieved parity with Russia with a good chance of having the advantage over Russia.

The rest of your post is still garbage but that took longer then I expected to type out.

Also as of today who controls Mykolaiv, Odessa, and Kherson

Your figures are not verified.

They are Ukrainian and pro-Ukrainian claims. If they were doing so well then how come they can barely do anything against Russia except dig in to slow the advance? Mmm? Oh I see, you dont want me to ask that do you?

[DarkHunter]

2 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

Your figures are not verified.

They are Ukrainian and pro-Ukrainian claims. If they were doing so well then how come they can barely do anything against Russia except dig in to slow the advance? Mmm? Oh I see, you dont want me to ask that do you?

There are pictures of each of the tanks Russia lost along with pictures of the captured Russian tanks.

Ukraine has liberated about half of the territory that Russia has taken with only a pause in liberating territory occuring over the winter.  Shortly before winter started Ukraine liberated Kherson, the only regional capital that the Russian military was able to take.  Wouldnt exactly call that digging in and slowing Russia's advance.

Once again can you answer who as of today controls Mykolaiv, Odessa, and Kherson.  I doubt you can since all you do is troll and push pro-Russia garbage.

[Occult1]

There is a report from the WSJ that Ukraine sent untrained conscripts to defend Bakhmut to try to preserve manpower:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/36-hours-in-bakhmut-one-units-desperate-battle-to-hold-back-the-russians-72e30f01

Edited May 25 by Occult1

[Electric Scooter]

1 hour ago, DarkHunter said:

There are pictures of each of the tanks Russia lost along with pictures of the captured Russian tanks.

Ukraine has liberated about half of the territory that Russia has taken with only a pause in liberating territory occuring over the winter.  Shortly before winter started Ukraine liberated Kherson, the only regional capital that the Russian military was able to take.  Wouldnt exactly call that digging in and slowing Russia's advance.

Once again can you answer who as of today controls Mykolaiv, Odessa, and Kherson.  I doubt you can since all you do is troll and push pro-Russia garbage.

There are pictures of tanks.

And Russia withdraw its forces from Northern Ukrainian, it was not a liberation.

[Electric Scooter]

5 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

There is a report from the WSJ that Ukraine sent untrained conscripts to defend Bakhmut to try to preserve manpower:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/36-hours-in-bakhmut-one-units-desperate-battle-to-hold-back-the-russians-72e30f01

Desperation move.

[Occult1]

2 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

Once again can you answer who as of today controls Mykolaiv, Odessa, and Kherson.  I doubt you can since all you do is troll and push pro-Russia garbage.

Russia still controls about 70% of Kherson Oblast though. They preserved their land bridge from mainland Russia to Crimea.

You could aslo argue that they exchanged what is mostly symbolic (the capital) for a much safer position (east of the Dniper river).

Edited May 25 by Occult1

[Trelane]

26 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

There are pictures of tanks.

And Russia withdraw its forces from Northern Ukrainian, it was not a liberation.

One man's withdrawal is another's hasty retreat due to maintenance failures, command and control incompetence, and tactical ineptness. 

Nice try Cookie, swing and a miss.

[Trelane]

22 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

Russia still controls about 70% of Kherson Oblast though. They preserved their land bridge from mainland Russia to Crimea.

You could aslo argue that they exchanged what is mostly symbolic (the capital) to a much safer position (east of the Dniper river).

I will enjoy watching your coping as the next counter offensive fires up. The Bakhmut stratagem clearly has worked as early reports of troop movements indicate. meanwhile in Mother Russia, Vladdy is quietly and desperately engaging in a third set of round ups for conscripts due to the heavy losses over the winter. All the while he and Priggy thought that a small tactical victory would mean something on the macro level in the theater of operations. They have been so distracted they have no idea where the other patriot batteries are, the dispersal of other tank systems, and oh yeah where are those pesky Bradley IFVs now? The next few weeks will be interesting to observe. 

 

[DarkHunter]

37 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

There are pictures of tanks.

And Russia withdraw its forces from Northern Ukrainian, it was not a liberation.

Pictures of tanks with the turrets blown off for destroyed tanks and pictures of Russian tanks with clear Russian markings being taken my clearly identified Ukranian soldiers.

You can call it whatever you want but Russia no longer controls approximately 40% of the territory it once did in Ukraine.

Also once again as of today who controls Mykolaiv, Odessa, and Kherson.

[DarkHunter]

38 minutes ago, Occult1 said:

Russia still controls about 70% of Kherson Oblast though. They preserved their land bridge from mainland Russia to Crimea.

You could aslo argue that they exchanged what is mostly symbolic (the capital) for a much safer position (east of the Dniper river).

If I remember correctly you were one of the ones who said Ukraine was never going to get Kherson back, but yet they did.  You can try to deflect Russian failures as much as you want but the reality is the Russian military has lost 40% of the territory it once occupied andhasnt really been able to capture significantly more for about a year.

[Unusual Tournament]

5 hours ago, Electric Scooter said:

Your figures are not verified.

They are Ukrainian and pro-Ukrainian claims. If they were doing so well then how come they can barely do anything against Russia except dig in to slow the advance? Mmm? Oh I see, you dont want me to ask that do you?

No, they are not verified, but complete nonsense. If Ukraine had that many tanks then they wouldn’t have have lost so much territory during the opening months of the war when invasion was at its most fluid. Let angry man DH have his littlest of victories 

Edited May 25 by Unusual Tournament

[Unusual Tournament]

2 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

If I remember correctly you were one of the ones who said Ukraine was never going to get Kherson back, but yet they did.  You can try to deflect Russian failures as much as you want but the reality is the Russian military has lost 40% of the territory it once occupied andhasnt really been able to capture significantly more for about a year.

If I remember correctly, Ukraine sold off the majority of its arms depots during the 90’s and 00’s to African warlords, arms dealers and middlemen. Ukraine was the forward staging point for the Soviet empire and thus basically one giant arms depot. Corruption is ingrained in Ukrainian politics and culture and if not for American geostratgic politics there would be no Ukraine because there was no weapons in the country 

[Unusual Tournament]

3 hours ago, Occult1 said:

Russia still controls about 70% of Kherson Oblast though. They preserved their land bridge from mainland Russia to Crimea.

You could aslo argue that they exchanged what is mostly symbolic (the capital) for a much safer position (east of the Dniper river).

East of the Dniper would have been a more achievable goal for Putin instead land locking Ukraine. It’s this Russian greed we should be thankful for

[DarkHunter]

2 minutes ago, Unusual Tournament said:

If I remember correctly, Ukraine sold off the majority of its arms depots during the 90’s and 00’s to African warlords, arms dealers and middlemen. Ukraine was the forward staging point for the Soviet empire and thus basically one giant arms depot. Corruption is ingrained in Ukrainian politics and culture and if not for American geostratgic politics there would be no Ukraine because there was no weapons in the country 

At the fall of the USSR the Ukranian military had approximately 6,500 tanks of which it did sell most of them but they still had approximately 1,000 tanks in service or storage around 2014.

Despite selling off most of its military equipment the Ukranian military still has more military equipment then most countries.

[jmccr8]

looks like Bakhmut is not finished uet

[Trelane]

Ultimately this current win for Russia is a pyrrhic victory when examined closely. I would be surprised if they could hold it if a reinforced Ukrainian element assaulted that position again.

I don't think that has been the focus for Ukraine though. The long-fought battle there did exactly what it was intended to do. The warm weather has arrived, and things are about to get very warm indeed elsewhere.

[Alchopwn]

On 5/22/2023 at 2:32 PM, Electric Scooter said:

Thats just it though, the Russians haven`t lost many taking the city.

Thats why its been so slow. Rather than surge in and loose a load of men they have taken their time and used artillery to blow their opponents to bits.

Actually the Russians have lost about 100,000 in the taking of Bakhmut alone.  Russians have often been denied artillery ammunition by precision strikes, so your picture of the situation is incorrect.  The Russians have been sending in waves of infantry and they have died in job lots.

On 5/25/2023 at 5:28 PM, Electric Scooter said:

I can understand Russia using its old stuff when its opponent has very few tanks of its own to counter them.

Russia is putting T54s, tanks older than I am, back in the field.  Not because Ukraine has few tanks (it's true, they don't have as many), but because NLAWs, Javelins, and Stuhnas have destroyed thousands of BTRs and the best tanks Russia could field.  Conservative estimates suggest that Russia has lost decades of stockpiled production, perhaps 2 generations worth. 

[Electric Scooter]

3 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Actually the Russians have lost about 100,000 in the taking of Bakhmut alone.  Russians have often been denied artillery ammunition by precision strikes, so your picture of the situation is incorrect.  The Russians have been sending in waves of infantry and they have died in job lots.

Russia is putting T54s, tanks older than I am, back in the field.  Not because Ukraine has few tanks (it's true, they don't have as many), but because NLAWs, Javelins, and Stuhnas have destroyed thousands of BTRs and the best tanks Russia could field.  Conservative estimates suggest that Russia has lost decades of stockpiled production, perhaps 2 generations worth. 

No they haven`t, that US general who does the White House briefs announced 3-4 weeks back that so far in the whole conflict the Russians had lost somewhere between 35,000 and 50,000 soldiers. Thats the whole conflict. And he said its at least 200,000 Ukrainians soldiers dead.

[jmccr8]

 

[+Nuclear Wessel]

4 minutes ago, Electric Scooter said:

No they haven`t, that US general who does the White House briefs announced 3-4 weeks back that so far in the whole conflict the Russians had lost somewhere between 35,000 and 50,000 soldiers. Thats the whole conflict. And he said its at least 200,000 Ukrainians soldiers dead.

On May 4th it was announced by the White House that about 20k Russians had been lost (about half being PMC Wagner mercenaries) within the last five months, 100k total casualties (including wounded and killed). 200,000 Ukrainian soldiers dead is a very high figure, but I suspect that the source was a poorly worded article that was discussing 200k casualties factoring in both sides, which is not unreasonable.

The Pentagon leak indicates that at the time in February about 36k - 44k Russians had died with 16k - 17.5k Ukrainian soldiers had died - this was all in the span over a year. Given the conditions in Bakhmut the figure of 20k Russian soldiers killed over the past five months does seem reasonable - that's roughly 500 more soldiers, per month, dying. I wouldn't be surprised that it was on the lower end of the estimation spectrum, considering that Ukraine was heavily defending the position and the attacker is going to suffer more losses, on average.

[DarkHunter]

1 hour ago, Electric Scooter said:

No they haven`t, that US general who does the White House briefs announced 3-4 weeks back that so far in the whole conflict the Russians had lost somewhere between 35,000 and 50,000 soldiers. Thats the whole conflict. And he said its at least 200,000 Ukrainians soldiers dead.

Then you should be able to provide an article or video clip of this or are we just supposed to take your word on this.  So far all American estimates of Ukranian losses are approximately 100,000 casaulties which is far less then your claim they said 200,000 killed.

The numbers you try to push are often complete garbage and just made up so you going with 200,000 dead Ukranian soldiers isnt surprising.