sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/if-ukraine-says-it-is-winning-what-does-losing-look-like/

A Counter-Counteroffensive

State of the Union: If Ukraine says it is winning, what does losing look like?

"Ukraine is winning," a June 21 headline from POLITICO read in part.

The author of the piece was none other than Denys Shmyhal, the prime minister of Ukraine. "More than a year after the big war began, it's obvious that Russia hasn't reached its strategic goals," Shmyhal writes, "which means Ukraine is winning."

Certainly, Russia has had a tougher go of it in Ukraine than expected, but nearly a fifth of Ukrainian territory lies in Russian hands; even when Shmyhal published this piece, it was clear Ukraine's counteroffensive was failing. The only basis that Shmyhal can claim Ukraine is winning the war is through blatantly misstating Russia's objectives, which he says is "to destroy Ukraine."
Shmyhal's framing allows Ukraine to proclaim victory as long as it remains on the map, even when settling the conflict with Russia will likely include forking over large portions of Ukrainian territory and the abandonment of any NATO or E.U. ambitions. Clever, but not clever enough, especially in light of the events in the month since.
In the last week, Ukraine has decided to pause its counteroffensive and adjust its tactics. The Ukrainian advance, if one can call it that, has come at the expense of heavy personnel and equipment losses, and has fallen far short of expectations.
American and European officials reportedly told the New York Times that, in the first two weeks of the six-week counteroffensive, a quarter of Ukraine's weaponry was damaged or destroyed. In the weeks that followed, the weaponry loss rate hovered around 10 percent....

---

Russia (and many of the "experts" you cite) expected to conquer Ukraine in 2-3 days.

---

They expected Ukraine to surrender, which is quite a different thing. And the Donbas was far from uncontested. Kiev has been trying to subdue and secure it for almost ten years.

---

Well, they expected Ukraine to surrender, but only after annihilating their military, which, of course, never happened.

As for Donbas. I was referring to the initial invasion in this war in 2022. Yes, U and R and have fought in Donbas for almost a decade. And there has of course been heavy fighting in this war, with ground changing hands. But, most of the what Russia controls there now was largely uncontested in early 2022 - mostly smaller cities.

Do you think Russia would say it has been successful in the Donbas?

---

They've been very successful. I don't think they initially wanted to annihilate Ukraine's military, but they pretty much have at this point. There's certainly no realistic scenario where they'll be driven out.

---

Then why are they sitting deep in their trenches giving up ground, men, and hardware?

I've not seen the worst of Putin puppets say Russia has been "very successful." Your the first.

---

You should have just said that in the first place. It would have told me everything I needed to know about the quality of your sources.

---

At this point, I'll take any source that says Russia's Ukraine invasion has been a success and backs it up with data. So by all means, provide it.

Again, we (as many are) can debate whether Ukraine's offensive will pick up steam and where all of this is ultimately going. But we can't debate satellites or Russia's steady loss of ground.

---

Quote:

---

BRUSSELS--When Ukraine launched its big counteroffensive this spring, Western military officials knew Kyiv didn't have all the training or weapons--from shells to warplanes--that it needed to dislodge Russian forces. But they hoped Ukrainian courage and resourcefulness would carry the day.

They haven't. Deep and deadly minefields, extensive fortifications and Russian air power have combined to largely block significant advances by Ukrainian troops. Instead, the campaign risks descending into a stalemate with the potential to burn through lives and equipment without a major shift in momentum.

As the likelihood of any large-scale breakthrough by the Ukrainians this year dims, it raises the unsettling prospect for Washington and its allies of a longer war--one that would require a huge new infusion of sophisticated armaments and more training to give Kyiv a chance at victory.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraines-lack-of-weaponry-and-training-risks-stalemate-in-fight-with-russia/ar-AA1edW4t

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/if-ukraine-says-it-is-winning-what-does-losing-look-like/

A Counter-Counteroffensive

State of the Union: If Ukraine says it is winning, what does losing look like?

"Ukraine is winning," a June 21 headline from POLITICO read in part.

The author of the piece was none other than Denys Shmyhal, the prime minister of Ukraine. "More than a year after the big war began, it's obvious that Russia hasn't reached its strategic goals," Shmyhal writes, "which means Ukraine is winning."

Certainly, Russia has had a tougher go of it in Ukraine than expected, but nearly a fifth of Ukrainian territory lies in Russian hands; even when Shmyhal published this piece, it was clear Ukraine's counteroffensive was failing. The only basis that Shmyhal can claim Ukraine is winning the war is through blatantly misstating Russia's objectives, which he says is "to destroy Ukraine."
Shmyhal's framing allows Ukraine to proclaim victory as long as it remains on the map, even when settling the conflict with Russia will likely include forking over large portions of Ukrainian territory and the abandonment of any NATO or E.U. ambitions. Clever, but not clever enough, especially in light of the events in the month since.
In the last week, Ukraine has decided to pause its counteroffensive and adjust its tactics. The Ukrainian advance, if one can call it that, has come at the expense of heavy personnel and equipment losses, and has fallen far short of expectations.
American and European officials reportedly told the New York Times that, in the first two weeks of the six-week counteroffensive, a quarter of Ukraine's weaponry was damaged or destroyed. In the weeks that followed, the weaponry loss rate hovered around 10 percent....

---

Russia (and many of the "experts" you cite) expected to conquer Ukraine in 2-3 days.

---

They expected Ukraine to surrender, which is quite a different thing. And the Donbas was far from uncontested. Kiev has been trying to subdue and secure it for almost ten years.

---

Well, they expected Ukraine to surrender, but only after annihilating their military, which, of course, never happened.

As for Donbas. I was referring to the initial invasion in this war in 2022. Yes, U and R and have fought in Donbas for almost a decade. And there has of course been heavy fighting in this war, with ground changing hands. But, most of the what Russia controls there now was largely uncontested in early 2022 - mostly smaller cities.

Do you think Russia would say it has been successful in the Donbas?

---

They've been very successful. I don't think they initially wanted to annihilate Ukraine's military, but they pretty much have at this point. There's certainly no realistic scenario where they'll be driven out.

---

Then why are they sitting deep in their trenches giving up ground, men, and hardware?

I've not seen the worst of Putin puppets say Russia has been "very successful." Your the first.

---

You should have just said that in the first place. It would have told me everything I needed to know about the quality of your sources.

---

At this point, I'll take any source that says Russia's Ukraine invasion has been a success and backs it up with data. So by all means, provide it.

Again, we (as many are) can debate whether Ukraine's offensive will pick up steam and where all of this is ultimately going. But we can't debate satellites or Russia's steady loss of ground.

---

From Saturday's WSJ:

Quote:

---

BRUSSELS--When Ukraine launched its big counteroffensive this spring, Western military officials knew Kyiv didn't have all the training or weapons--from shells to warplanes--that it needed to dislodge Russian forces. But they hoped Ukrainian courage and resourcefulness would carry the day.

They haven't. Deep and deadly minefields, extensive fortifications and Russian air power have combined to largely block significant advances by Ukrainian troops. Instead, the campaign risks descending into a stalemate with the potential to burn through lives and equipment without a major shift in momentum.

As the likelihood of any large-scale breakthrough by the Ukrainians this year dims, it raises the unsettling prospect for Washington and its allies of a longer war--one that would require a huge new infusion of sophisticated armaments and more training to give Kyiv a chance at victory.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraines-lack-of-weaponry-and-training-risks-stalemate-in-fight-with-russia/ar-AA1edW4t

---

---

JUST IN: China is secretly sending enough gear to Russia to equip an army, per Politico.

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) July 24, 2023

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/if-ukraine-says-it-is-winning-what-does-losing-look-like/

A Counter-Counteroffensive

State of the Union: If Ukraine says it is winning, what does losing look like?

"Ukraine is winning," a June 21 headline from POLITICO read in part.

The author of the piece was none other than Denys Shmyhal, the prime minister of Ukraine. "More than a year after the big war began, it's obvious that Russia hasn't reached its strategic goals," Shmyhal writes, "which means Ukraine is winning."

Certainly, Russia has had a tougher go of it in Ukraine than expected, but nearly a fifth of Ukrainian territory lies in Russian hands; even when Shmyhal published this piece, it was clear Ukraine's counteroffensive was failing. The only basis that Shmyhal can claim Ukraine is winning the war is through blatantly misstating Russia's objectives, which he says is "to destroy Ukraine."
Shmyhal's framing allows Ukraine to proclaim victory as long as it remains on the map, even when settling the conflict with Russia will likely include forking over large portions of Ukrainian territory and the abandonment of any NATO or E.U. ambitions. Clever, but not clever enough, especially in light of the events in the month since.
In the last week, Ukraine has decided to pause its counteroffensive and adjust its tactics. The Ukrainian advance, if one can call it that, has come at the expense of heavy personnel and equipment losses, and has fallen far short of expectations.
American and European officials reportedly told the New York Times that, in the first two weeks of the six-week counteroffensive, a quarter of Ukraine's weaponry was damaged or destroyed. In the weeks that followed, the weaponry loss rate hovered around 10 percent....

---

Russia (and many of the "experts" you cite) expected to conquer Ukraine in 2-3 days.

---

They expected Ukraine to surrender, which is quite a different thing. And the Donbas was far from uncontested. Kiev has been trying to subdue and secure it for almost ten years.

---

Well, they expected Ukraine to surrender, but only after annihilating their military, which, of course, never happened.

As for Donbas. I was referring to the initial invasion in this war in 2022. Yes, U and R and have fought in Donbas for almost a decade. And there has of course been heavy fighting in this war, with ground changing hands. But, most of the what Russia controls there now was largely uncontested in early 2022 - mostly smaller cities.

Do you think Russia would say it has been successful in the Donbas?

---

They've been very successful. I don't think they initially wanted to annihilate Ukraine's military, but they pretty much have at this point. There's certainly no realistic scenario where they'll be driven out.

---

Then why are they sitting deep in their trenches giving up ground, men, and hardware?

I've not seen the worst of Putin puppets say Russia has been "very successful." Your the first.

---

You should have just said that in the first place. It would have told me everything I needed to know about the quality of your sources.

---

At this point, I'll take any source that says Russia's Ukraine invasion has been a success and backs it up with data. So by all means, provide it.

Again, we (as many are) can debate whether Ukraine's offensive will pick up steam and where all of this is ultimately going. But we can't debate satellites or Russia's steady loss of ground.

---

From Saturday's WSJ:

Quote:

---

BRUSSELS--When Ukraine launched its big counteroffensive this spring, Western military officials knew Kyiv didn't have all the training or weapons--from shells to warplanes--that it needed to dislodge Russian forces. But they hoped Ukrainian courage and resourcefulness would carry the day.

They haven't. Deep and deadly minefields, extensive fortifications and Russian air power have combined to largely block significant advances by Ukrainian troops. Instead, the campaign risks descending into a stalemate with the potential to burn through lives and equipment without a major shift in momentum.

As the likelihood of any large-scale breakthrough by the Ukrainians this year dims, it raises the unsettling prospect for Washington and its allies of a longer war--one that would require a huge new infusion of sophisticated armaments and more training to give Kyiv a chance at victory.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraines-lack-of-weaponry-and-training-risks-stalemate-in-fight-with-russia/ar-AA1edW4t

---

---

This is nothing new. Again, it's fair to question the success and speed of the counter. I've posted that several times and added that our corp intel agrees. But that's a far cry from saying Russia's overall invasion has been successful. It certainly has not been. They've lost almost 2/3 of the ground they initially controlled and continue to give up ground. If that's success and winning, I'd love to see failure and losing.

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/if-ukraine-says-it-is-winning-what-does-losing-look-like/

A Counter-Counteroffensive

State of the Union: If Ukraine says it is winning, what does losing look like?

"Ukraine is winning," a June 21 headline from POLITICO read in part.

The author of the piece was none other than Denys Shmyhal, the prime minister of Ukraine. "More than a year after the big war began, it's obvious that Russia hasn't reached its strategic goals," Shmyhal writes, "which means Ukraine is winning."

Certainly, Russia has had a tougher go of it in Ukraine than expected, but nearly a fifth of Ukrainian territory lies in Russian hands; even when Shmyhal published this piece, it was clear Ukraine's counteroffensive was failing. The only basis that Shmyhal can claim Ukraine is winning the war is through blatantly misstating Russia's objectives, which he says is "to destroy Ukraine."
Shmyhal's framing allows Ukraine to proclaim victory as long as it remains on the map, even when settling the conflict with Russia will likely include forking over large portions of Ukrainian territory and the abandonment of any NATO or E.U. ambitions. Clever, but not clever enough, especially in light of the events in the month since.
In the last week, Ukraine has decided to pause its counteroffensive and adjust its tactics. The Ukrainian advance, if one can call it that, has come at the expense of heavy personnel and equipment losses, and has fallen far short of expectations.
American and European officials reportedly told the New York Times that, in the first two weeks of the six-week counteroffensive, a quarter of Ukraine's weaponry was damaged or destroyed. In the weeks that followed, the weaponry loss rate hovered around 10 percent....

---

Russia (and many of the "experts" you cite) expected to conquer Ukraine in 2-3 days.

---

They expected Ukraine to surrender, which is quite a different thing. And the Donbas was far from uncontested. Kiev has been trying to subdue and secure it for almost ten years.

---

Well, they expected Ukraine to surrender, but only after annihilating their military, which, of course, never happened.

As for Donbas. I was referring to the initial invasion in this war in 2022. Yes, U and R and have fought in Donbas for almost a decade. And there has of course been heavy fighting in this war, with ground changing hands. But, most of the what Russia controls there now was largely uncontested in early 2022 - mostly smaller cities.

Do you think Russia would say it has been successful in the Donbas?

---

They've been very successful. I don't think they initially wanted to annihilate Ukraine's military, but they pretty much have at this point. There's certainly no realistic scenario where they'll be driven out.

---

Then why are they sitting deep in their trenches giving up ground, men, and hardware?

I've not seen the worst of Putin puppets say Russia has been "very successful." Your the first.

---

You should have just said that in the first place. It would have told me everything I needed to know about the quality of your sources.

---

At this point, I'll take any source that says Russia's Ukraine invasion has been a success and backs it up with data. So by all means, provide it.

Again, we (as many are) can debate whether Ukraine's offensive will pick up steam and where all of this is ultimately going. But we can't debate satellites or Russia's steady loss of ground.

---

From Saturday's WSJ:

Quote:

---

BRUSSELS--When Ukraine launched its big counteroffensive this spring, Western military officials knew Kyiv didn't have all the training or weapons--from shells to warplanes--that it needed to dislodge Russian forces. But they hoped Ukrainian courage and resourcefulness would carry the day.

They haven't. Deep and deadly minefields, extensive fortifications and Russian air power have combined to largely block significant advances by Ukrainian troops. Instead, the campaign risks descending into a stalemate with the potential to burn through lives and equipment without a major shift in momentum.

As the likelihood of any large-scale breakthrough by the Ukrainians this year dims, it raises the unsettling prospect for Washington and its allies of a longer war--one that would require a huge new infusion of sophisticated armaments and more training to give Kyiv a chance at victory.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraines-lack-of-weaponry-and-training-risks-stalemate-in-fight-with-russia/ar-AA1edW4t

---

---

This is nothing new. Again, it's fair to question the success and speed of the counter. I've posted that several times and added that our corp intel agrees. But that's a far cry from saying Russia's overall invasion has been successful. It certainly has not been. They've lost almost 2/3 of the ground they initially controlled and continue to give up ground. If that's success and winning, I'd love to see failure and losing.

---

Yea,

Its also a question of what is success for each side look like.

Russia invaded with the intention of getting hold of Kyiv and putting a friendly pro-Moscow government in power.

Similar to what we did in Iraq in 2003 (get to Bagdad & over throw Saddam's Ba'athist government).

Get the new government in Kyiv to agree to their annexation of the Donbas and Crimea.

That failed....

And they have lost a lot of the ground they took.

But they still have Crimea and the Donbas and they look to be able to hold those areas long term.

The real question is what does success for Zelensky and his government look like.

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/if-ukraine-says-it-is-winning-what-does-losing-look-like/

A Counter-Counteroffensive

State of the Union: If Ukraine says it is winning, what does losing look like?

"Ukraine is winning," a June 21 headline from POLITICO read in part.

The author of the piece was none other than Denys Shmyhal, the prime minister of Ukraine. "More than a year after the big war began, it's obvious that Russia hasn't reached its strategic goals," Shmyhal writes, "which means Ukraine is winning."

Certainly, Russia has had a tougher go of it in Ukraine than expected, but nearly a fifth of Ukrainian territory lies in Russian hands; even when Shmyhal published this piece, it was clear Ukraine's counteroffensive was failing. The only basis that Shmyhal can claim Ukraine is winning the war is through blatantly misstating Russia's objectives, which he says is "to destroy Ukraine."
Shmyhal's framing allows Ukraine to proclaim victory as long as it remains on the map, even when settling the conflict with Russia will likely include forking over large portions of Ukrainian territory and the abandonment of any NATO or E.U. ambitions. Clever, but not clever enough, especially in light of the events in the month since.
In the last week, Ukraine has decided to pause its counteroffensive and adjust its tactics. The Ukrainian advance, if one can call it that, has come at the expense of heavy personnel and equipment losses, and has fallen far short of expectations.
American and European officials reportedly told the New York Times that, in the first two weeks of the six-week counteroffensive, a quarter of Ukraine's weaponry was damaged or destroyed. In the weeks that followed, the weaponry loss rate hovered around 10 percent....

---

Russia (and many of the "experts" you cite) expected to conquer Ukraine in 2-3 days.

---

They expected Ukraine to surrender, which is quite a different thing. And the Donbas was far from uncontested. Kiev has been trying to subdue and secure it for almost ten years.

---

Well, they expected Ukraine to surrender, but only after annihilating their military, which, of course, never happened.

As for Donbas. I was referring to the initial invasion in this war in 2022. Yes, U and R and have fought in Donbas for almost a decade. And there has of course been heavy fighting in this war, with ground changing hands. But, most of the what Russia controls there now was largely uncontested in early 2022 - mostly smaller cities.

Do you think Russia would say it has been successful in the Donbas?

---

They've been very successful. I don't think they initially wanted to annihilate Ukraine's military, but they pretty much have at this point. There's certainly no realistic scenario where they'll be driven out.

---

Then why are they sitting deep in their trenches giving up ground, men, and hardware?

I've not seen the worst of Putin puppets say Russia has been "very successful." Your the first.

---

You should have just said that in the first place. It would have told me everything I needed to know about the quality of your sources.

---

At this point, I'll take any source that says Russia's Ukraine invasion has been a success and backs it up with data. So by all means, provide it.

Again, we (as many are) can debate whether Ukraine's offensive will pick up steam and where all of this is ultimately going. But we can't debate satellites or Russia's steady loss of ground.

---

From Saturday's WSJ:

Quote:

---

BRUSSELS--When Ukraine launched its big counteroffensive this spring, Western military officials knew Kyiv didn't have all the training or weapons--from shells to warplanes--that it needed to dislodge Russian forces. But they hoped Ukrainian courage and resourcefulness would carry the day.

They haven't. Deep and deadly minefields, extensive fortifications and Russian air power have combined to largely block significant advances by Ukrainian troops. Instead, the campaign risks descending into a stalemate with the potential to burn through lives and equipment without a major shift in momentum.

As the likelihood of any large-scale breakthrough by the Ukrainians this year dims, it raises the unsettling prospect for Washington and its allies of a longer war--one that would require a huge new infusion of sophisticated armaments and more training to give Kyiv a chance at victory.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ukraines-lack-of-weaponry-and-training-risks-stalemate-in-fight-with-russia/ar-AA1edW4t

---

---

This is nothing new. Again, it's fair to question the success and speed of the counter. I've posted that several times and added that our corp intel agrees. But that's a far cry from saying Russia's overall invasion has been successful. It certainly has not been. They've lost almost 2/3 of the ground they initially controlled and continue to give up ground. If that's success and winning, I'd love to see failure and losing.

---

Ukraine's population has dropped from 52 million to 31 million in just three decades. Is it even possible to talk of "victory" under such conditions? pic.twitter.com/7xu2iMJpS0

— RAW EGG NATIONALIST (@Babygravy9) July 24, 2023

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

whiterock said:

---

Pravda today is confirming that Ukraine has now captured Avdiivka, on the northern outskirts of Donetsk City. It is of course symbolically significant that Ukrainian troops are on the outskirts of the capitol city of Donetsk province. But there is a far more important factor at play. Check the map.



The black lines are railways. When Ukraine seizes that rail yard in downtown Donetsk, or encircles and besieges Donetsk, all Russian units west of Donetsk are severed from rail communication directly to Russia. All supply shipments from Russia to units on the Kherson and Zapo fronts will have to be trucked over a single highway from Rostov to Melitopol, or on rail/truck lines via Crimea (which of course must traverse the Kerch Bridge AND the two Svash chokepoints, one of which was reduced to pontoon bridge a couple of weeks ago.

when Donetsk falls, Crimea is effectively under siege. Russia will, at some point, be forced by supply issue to withdraw their western armies to the Crimea.

None of that is imminent. But such things are subject to the "slowly, then suddenly" model of failure. Russia is losing ground by the kilometer every day. No single kilometer is terribly important. Until one is. Those rail yards in Donetsk are terribly important.

Ukraine COULD advance down from Donetsk and cross into Russian territory to cut the highway between Rostov and Melitopol. They have are no reserves to stop it, other than the grandpas and schoolboys that typically make up territorial guards units. Interestingly, there is an unverified report out today that Russia has rigged the bridges in/out of Melitopol with explosives. If true, that would suggest that Russia is starting to make contingency plans for the collapse of the center of their line in Donetsk, which happens to be a primary area of Ukrainian gains.

Imagine the spectacle of 200k troops or so on the Zapo front being supplied primarily across a pontoon bridge across the Svash, and there is no maintenance yard to supply broken down trucks with new batteries or tires because Ukraine blew it all up yesterday.

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

It's actually a good example of what I'm talking about. If you follow the maps regularly, you should know that Avdiivka has been contested throughout the war and that the Ukrainians have controlled it most of the time. What's being hailed as a major breakthrough is so far just another case of trading territory. There's no reason to think the Ukrainians are any closer to capturing Donetsk than they were a year ago.

---

100% wrong. Russia has controlled key parts since early 2022 and steadily increased its control. Ukraine's offensive (reportedly) has pushed the Russians out for the first time since February 2022 when Russia aided the separatists.

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Both sides are under the fantansy that they can win.


"Ukraine is unlikely to militarily evict Russia out of its territory, no matter how many men they feed into battle. And Russian can not militarily smash the Ukrainian army or take Kyiv"

"To succeed in its operation to cut the Russian land bridge to Crimea, I wrote that Ukrainian troops would have to attack through multiple belts of elaborate Russian defenses "with limited offensive air power, limited air defense, insufficient quantities of artillery shells, and a force that is equipped with a hodgepodge of modern and antiquated armor staffed by a mix of conscripts with no combat experience and some officers and men with basic training by NATO instructors."

"As unpalatable as it is for all supporters of Ukraine, the most prudent course for Zelensky may now be to seek a negotiated settlement that preserves as much freedom and territory as possible for Kyiv. Ending the war now would end the deaths and injuries for tens of thousands of Ukraine's brave and heroic fighters men and women whom Kyiv will need to rebuild their country once the war ends."

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

Both sides are under the fantansy that they can win.


"Ukraine is unlikely to militarily evict Russia out of its territory, no matter how many men they feed into battle. And Russian can not militarily smash the Ukrainian army or take Kyiv"

"To succeed in its operation to cut the Russian land bridge to Crimea, I wrote that Ukrainian troops would have to attack through multiple belts of elaborate Russian defenses "with limited offensive air power, limited air defense, insufficient quantities of artillery shells, and a force that is equipped with a hodgepodge of modern and antiquated armor staffed by a mix of conscripts with no combat experience and some officers and men with basic training by NATO instructors."

"As unpalatable as it is for all supporters of Ukraine, the most prudent course for Zelensky may now be to seek a negotiated settlement that preserves as much freedom and territory as possible for Kyiv. Ending the war now would end the deaths and injuries for tens of thousands of Ukraine's brave and heroic fighters men and women whom Kyiv will need to rebuild their country once the war ends."

---

I will say, after the Afghanistan withdrawal fiasco, I tried to give Austin and Milley the benefit of the doubt and presumed they had been overruled by Biden. Now with reports that they knew how under-manned, under-trained, and under-equipped the Ukrainians were and they still somehow expected the offensive to succeed, it's clear that trust was unwarranted. These clowns have no idea what they're doing.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

It's actually a good example of what I'm talking about. If you follow the maps regularly, you should know that Avdiivka has been contested throughout the war and that the Ukrainians have controlled it most of the time. What's being hailed as a major breakthrough is so far just another case of trading territory. There's no reason to think the Ukrainians are any closer to capturing Donetsk than they were a year ago.

---

100% wrong. Russia has controlled key parts since early 2022 and steadily increased its control. Ukraine's offensive (reportedly) has pushed the Russians out for the first time since February 2022 when Russia aided the separatists.

---

Avdiivka has been under siege by Russians for the past year. Ukrainian forces only surrendered about a month ago.

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

It's actually a good example of what I'm talking about. If you follow the maps regularly, you should know that Avdiivka has been contested throughout the war and that the Ukrainians have controlled it most of the time. What's being hailed as a major breakthrough is so far just another case of trading territory. There's no reason to think the Ukrainians are any closer to capturing Donetsk than they were a year ago.

---

100% wrong. Russia has controlled key parts since early 2022 and steadily increased its control. Ukraine's offensive (reportedly) has pushed the Russians out for the first time since February 2022 when Russia aided the separatists.

---

Avdiivka has been under siege by Russians for the past year. Ukrainian forces only surrendered about a month ago.

---

No. Russia steadily increased its control there from the start, and Ukraine surrendered in May. Ukraine (reportedly) now has control they have not had since before the early 2022 invasion, and, in fact, going back years before.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

It's actually a good example of what I'm talking about. If you follow the maps regularly, you should know that Avdiivka has been contested throughout the war and that the Ukrainians have controlled it most of the time. What's being hailed as a major breakthrough is so far just another case of trading territory. There's no reason to think the Ukrainians are any closer to capturing Donetsk than they were a year ago.

---

100% wrong. Russia has controlled key parts since early 2022 and steadily increased its control. Ukraine's offensive (reportedly) has pushed the Russians out for the first time since February 2022 when Russia aided the separatists.

---

Avdiivka has been under siege by Russians for the past year. Ukrainian forces only surrendered about a month ago.

---

No. Russia steadily increased its control there from the start, and Ukraine surrendered in May. Ukraine (reportedly) now has control they have not had since before the early 2022 invasion, and, in fact, going back years before.

---

So it's been contested all along and has reportedly changed hands twice in the last two months. I'm not sure how that's different from what I've been saying.

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

It's actually a good example of what I'm talking about. If you follow the maps regularly, you should know that Avdiivka has been contested throughout the war and that the Ukrainians have controlled it most of the time. What's being hailed as a major breakthrough is so far just another case of trading territory. There's no reason to think the Ukrainians are any closer to capturing Donetsk than they were a year ago.

---

100% wrong. Russia has controlled key parts since early 2022 and steadily increased its control. Ukraine's offensive (reportedly) has pushed the Russians out for the first time since February 2022 when Russia aided the separatists.

---

Avdiivka has been under siege by Russians for the past year. Ukrainian forces only surrendered about a month ago.

---

No. Russia steadily increased its control there from the start, and Ukraine surrendered in May. Ukraine (reportedly) now has control they have not had since before the early 2022 invasion, and, in fact, going back years before.

---

So it's been contested all along and has reportedly changed hands twice in the last two months. I'm not sure how that's different from what I've been saying.

---

It has not changed hands twice in two months. Ukraine has not controlled it since the beginning of the invasion, and even that was tenuous. Yes, it has long been contested, but also largely controlled by Russia. Contested and controlled are not mutually exclusive. If the reports are true, Russian forces have left for the first time since the invasion (and, practically speaking, well before the invasion, as Russia had supporting forces there). If true, that is enormous. Most of the area is destroyed, but it's a very strategic area that Russia for very hard for and committed crazy resources there.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Pravda today is confirming that Ukraine has now captured Avdiivka, on the northern outskirts of Donetsk City. It is of course symbolically significant that Ukrainian troops are on the outskirts of the capitol city of Donetsk province. But there is a far more important factor at play. Check the map.



The black lines are railways. When Ukraine seizes that rail yard in downtown Donetsk, or encircles and besieges Donetsk, all Russian units west of Donetsk are severed from rail communication directly to Russia. All supply shipments from Russia to units on the Kherson and Zapo fronts will have to be trucked over a single highway from Rostov to Melitopol, or on rail/truck lines via Crimea (which of course must traverse the Kerch Bridge AND the two Svash chokepoints, one of which was reduced to pontoon bridge a couple of weeks ago.

when Donetsk falls, Crimea is effectively under siege. Russia will, at some point, be forced by supply issue to withdraw their western armies to the Crimea.

None of that is imminent. But such things are subject to the "slowly, then suddenly" model of failure. Russia is losing ground by the kilometer every day. No single kilometer is terribly important. Until one is. Those rail yards in Donetsk are terribly important.

Ukraine COULD advance down from Donetsk and cross into Russian territory to cut the highway between Rostov and Melitopol. They have are no reserves to stop it, other than the grandpas and schoolboys that typically make up territorial guards units. Interestingly, there is an unverified report out today that Russia has rigged the bridges in/out of Melitopol with explosives. If true, that would suggest that Russia is starting to make contingency plans for the collapse of the center of their line in Donetsk, which happens to be a primary area of Ukrainian gains.

Imagine the spectacle of 200k troops or so on the Zapo front being supplied primarily across a pontoon bridge across the Svash, and there is no maintenance yard to supply broken down trucks with new batteries or tires because Ukraine blew it all up yesterday.

---

You've been saying this for a couple of months. If the Ukrainians were advancing kilometers per day, they'd be in Russia by now.

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

sombear said:

---

Best news in some time.

Ukrainian forces south of Bakhmut liberated Andriivka. The liberation of Klishchiivka is imminent. Ukrainian forces already inside the village. Russian forces abandoning positions.

For the Ukrainian forces at the ridge line overlooking Klishchiivka this most certainly must be… pic.twitter.com/r8GtF0oD2m

— (((Tendar))) (@Tendar) July 25, 2023

---

It's actually a good example of what I'm talking about. If you follow the maps regularly, you should know that Avdiivka has been contested throughout the war and that the Ukrainians have controlled it most of the time. What's being hailed as a major breakthrough is so far just another case of trading territory. There's no reason to think the Ukrainians are any closer to capturing Donetsk than they were a year ago.

---

100% wrong. Russia has controlled key parts since early 2022 and steadily increased its control. Ukraine's offensive (reportedly) has pushed the Russians out for the first time since February 2022 when Russia aided the separatists.

---

Avdiivka has been under siege by Russians for the past year. Ukrainian forces only surrendered about a month ago.

---

No. Russia steadily increased its control there from the start, and Ukraine surrendered in May. Ukraine (reportedly) now has control they have not had since before the early 2022 invasion, and, in fact, going back years before.

---

So it's been contested all along and has reportedly changed hands twice in the last two months. I'm not sure how that's different from what I've been saying.

---

It has not changed hands twice in two months. Ukraine has not controlled it since the beginning of the invasion, and even that was tenuous. Yes, it has long been contested, but also largely controlled by Russia. Contested and controlled are not mutually exclusive. If the reports are true, Russian forces have left for the first time since the invasion (and, practically speaking, well before the invasion, as Russia had supporting forces there). If true, that is enormous. Most of the area is destroyed, but it's a very strategic area that Russia for very hard for and committed crazy resources there.

---

I don't know what to tell you.

---

On this day in 1949, Republican Senator Robert A. Taft of the “Old Right” gave a speech in opposition to the ratification of the NATO pact. He was one of only 13 to vote against it.

The speech he gave was extraordinarily prescient.

“Why did I vote against the Atlantic Pact? I… pic.twitter.com/NbSZk76dQ7

— Liam McCollum (@MLiamMcCollum) July 26, 2023

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Pravda today is confirming that Ukraine has now captured Avdiivka, on the northern outskirts of Donetsk City. It is of course symbolically significant that Ukrainian troops are on the outskirts of the capitol city of Donetsk province. But there is a far more important factor at play. Check the map.



The black lines are railways. When Ukraine seizes that rail yard in downtown Donetsk, or encircles and besieges Donetsk, all Russian units west of Donetsk are severed from rail communication directly to Russia. All supply shipments from Russia to units on the Kherson and Zapo fronts will have to be trucked over a single highway from Rostov to Melitopol, or on rail/truck lines via Crimea (which of course must traverse the Kerch Bridge AND the two Svash chokepoints, one of which was reduced to pontoon bridge a couple of weeks ago.

when Donetsk falls, Crimea is effectively under siege. Russia will, at some point, be forced by supply issue to withdraw their western armies to the Crimea.

None of that is imminent. But such things are subject to the "slowly, then suddenly" model of failure. Russia is losing ground by the kilometer every day. No single kilometer is terribly important. Until one is. Those rail yards in Donetsk are terribly important.

Ukraine COULD advance down from Donetsk and cross into Russian territory to cut the highway between Rostov and Melitopol. They have are no reserves to stop it, other than the grandpas and schoolboys that typically make up territorial guards units. Interestingly, there is an unverified report out today that Russia has rigged the bridges in/out of Melitopol with explosives. If true, that would suggest that Russia is starting to make contingency plans for the collapse of the center of their line in Donetsk, which happens to be a primary area of Ukrainian gains.

Imagine the spectacle of 200k troops or so on the Zapo front being supplied primarily across a pontoon bridge across the Svash, and there is no maintenance yard to supply broken down trucks with new batteries or tires because Ukraine blew it all up yesterday.

---

You've been saying this for a couple of months. If the Ukrainians were advancing kilometers per day, they'd be in Russia by now.

---

The rate of advance has accelerate from meters per day, to a kilometer or two. That works out to 10-25km total for the past six weeks. It is tactically significant, as the advances around Donetsk and Bakhmut indeed are. It is not, however, anywhere near Russia.

And the Uke heavy brigades have still not been engaged.......

More important is, it is amply clear from reports that the Ukes are doing exactly what I described several weeks ago - making cautious tactical movements to seize positions, then settling in and awaiting the inevitable human wave counter-attacks. Russians are obliging. The primary strategic objective of Uke attacks appear, however, not to be making the "big breakthrough" but rather attriting Russian artillery, which is being decimated. Russian communication and fire control procedures remain antiquated. They are emplaced and organized to do preparatory fires in support of Russian attacks, not respond to random fire missions, and of course the fuel and fleet to move tubes are in short supply.

Bakhmut has already been effectively encircled. Uke artillery already covers all lines of Russian communication. Klishchiivka is high ground which affords visual observation of all of those lines, so now any vehicle which attempts to enter/leave Bakhmut will be destroyed. I doubt Uke will make a serious attempt to take Bakhmut. They'll bypass it and let the Russians either surrender, or exhaust themselves in breakout attacks.

Same cannot be said for Donetsk. Uke will need it for symbolism, and for the rail yards.

---

4/ Recent Russian MoD claims of Russian advances along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line may be exaggerated in order to draw attention away from Ukrainian counteroffensive efforts elsewhere along the front, as ISW has previously assessed. https://t.co/AVvHgR5O5h

— ISW (@TheStudyofWar) July 26, 2023

Bear8084 said:

---

4/ Recent Russian MoD claims of Russian advances along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line may be exaggerated in order to draw attention away from Ukrainian counteroffensive efforts elsewhere along the front, as ISW has previously assessed. https://t.co/AVvHgR5O5h

— ISW (@TheStudyofWar) July 26, 2023

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Pravda today is confirming that Ukraine has now captured Avdiivka, on the northern outskirts of Donetsk City. It is of course symbolically significant that Ukrainian troops are on the outskirts of the capitol city of Donetsk province. But there is a far more important factor at play. Check the map.



The black lines are railways. When Ukraine seizes that rail yard in downtown Donetsk, or encircles and besieges Donetsk, all Russian units west of Donetsk are severed from rail communication directly to Russia. All supply shipments from Russia to units on the Kherson and Zapo fronts will have to be trucked over a single highway from Rostov to Melitopol, or on rail/truck lines via Crimea (which of course must traverse the Kerch Bridge AND the two Svash chokepoints, one of which was reduced to pontoon bridge a couple of weeks ago.

when Donetsk falls, Crimea is effectively under siege. Russia will, at some point, be forced by supply issue to withdraw their western armies to the Crimea.

None of that is imminent. But such things are subject to the "slowly, then suddenly" model of failure. Russia is losing ground by the kilometer every day. No single kilometer is terribly important. Until one is. Those rail yards in Donetsk are terribly important.

Ukraine COULD advance down from Donetsk and cross into Russian territory to cut the highway between Rostov and Melitopol. They have are no reserves to stop it, other than the grandpas and schoolboys that typically make up territorial guards units. Interestingly, there is an unverified report out today that Russia has rigged the bridges in/out of Melitopol with explosives. If true, that would suggest that Russia is starting to make contingency plans for the collapse of the center of their line in Donetsk, which happens to be a primary area of Ukrainian gains.

Imagine the spectacle of 200k troops or so on the Zapo front being supplied primarily across a pontoon bridge across the Svash, and there is no maintenance yard to supply broken down trucks with new batteries or tires because Ukraine blew it all up yesterday.

---

You've been saying this for a couple of months. If the Ukrainians were advancing kilometers per day, they'd be in Russia by now.

---

The rate of advance has accelerate from meters per day, to a kilometer or two. That works out to 10-25km total for the past six weeks. It is tactically significant, as the advances around Donetsk and Bakhmut indeed are. It is not, however, anywhere near Russia.

And the Uke heavy brigades have still not been engaged.......

More important is, it is amply clear from reports that the Ukes are doing exactly what I described several weeks ago - making cautious tactical movements to seize positions, then settling in and awaiting the inevitable human wave counter-attacks. Russians are obliging. The primary strategic objective of Uke attacks appear, however, not to be making the "big breakthrough" but rather attriting Russian artillery, which is being decimated. Russian communication and fire control procedures remain antiquated. They are emplaced and organized to do preparatory fires in support of Russian attacks, not respond to random fire missions, and of course the fuel and fleet to move tubes are in short supply.

Bakhmut has already been effectively encircled. Uke artillery already covers all lines of Russian communication. Klishchiivka is high ground which affords visual observation of all of those lines, so now any vehicle which attempts to enter/leave Bakhmut will be destroyed. I doubt Uke will make a serious attempt to take Bakhmut. They'll bypass it and let the Russians either surrender, or exhaust themselves in breakout attacks.

Same cannot be said for Donetsk. Uke will need it for symbolism, and for the rail yards.

---

It's not yet clear that Ukraine controls Klishschiivka or Andriivka. They still have Yahidne and Opytne to deal with before surrounding Bakhmut. Ignoring it would be the smartest thing they've done in a long time, but the rhetoric from Kiev suggests they're about to repeat their mistake. Ukraine's best tank brigades (33rd and 47th) were slaughtered at Robotyne in the early days of the offensive. They adopted the attrition strategy out of necessity. They're now attacking that area with large numbers of tanks and again taking heavy losses. All of which suits the Russians just fine.

If you want to see accelerated progress, keep your eye on the northeast. There's no mention of it in Western media, but the Russians are advancing at a half dozen or so points and have crossed the Zherebets River into Nadia and Serhiivka in the last couple of days. From there it's a straight shot to Borova and the chance to sever the Ukrainian line east of the Oskil.

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Pravda today is confirming that Ukraine has now captured Avdiivka, on the northern outskirts of Donetsk City. It is of course symbolically significant that Ukrainian troops are on the outskirts of the capitol city of Donetsk province. But there is a far more important factor at play. Check the map.



The black lines are railways. When Ukraine seizes that rail yard in downtown Donetsk, or encircles and besieges Donetsk, all Russian units west of Donetsk are severed from rail communication directly to Russia. All supply shipments from Russia to units on the Kherson and Zapo fronts will have to be trucked over a single highway from Rostov to Melitopol, or on rail/truck lines via Crimea (which of course must traverse the Kerch Bridge AND the two Svash chokepoints, one of which was reduced to pontoon bridge a couple of weeks ago.

when Donetsk falls, Crimea is effectively under siege. Russia will, at some point, be forced by supply issue to withdraw their western armies to the Crimea.

None of that is imminent. But such things are subject to the "slowly, then suddenly" model of failure. Russia is losing ground by the kilometer every day. No single kilometer is terribly important. Until one is. Those rail yards in Donetsk are terribly important.

Ukraine COULD advance down from Donetsk and cross into Russian territory to cut the highway between Rostov and Melitopol. They have are no reserves to stop it, other than the grandpas and schoolboys that typically make up territorial guards units. Interestingly, there is an unverified report out today that Russia has rigged the bridges in/out of Melitopol with explosives. If true, that would suggest that Russia is starting to make contingency plans for the collapse of the center of their line in Donetsk, which happens to be a primary area of Ukrainian gains.

Imagine the spectacle of 200k troops or so on the Zapo front being supplied primarily across a pontoon bridge across the Svash, and there is no maintenance yard to supply broken down trucks with new batteries or tires because Ukraine blew it all up yesterday.

---

You've been saying this for a couple of months. If the Ukrainians were advancing kilometers per day, they'd be in Russia by now.

---

The rate of advance has accelerate from meters per day, to a kilometer or two. That works out to 10-25km total for the past six weeks. It is tactically significant, as the advances around Donetsk and Bakhmut indeed are. It is not, however, anywhere near Russia.

And the Uke heavy brigades have still not been engaged.......

More important is, it is amply clear from reports that the Ukes are doing exactly what I described several weeks ago - making cautious tactical movements to seize positions, then settling in and awaiting the inevitable human wave counter-attacks. Russians are obliging. The primary strategic objective of Uke attacks appear, however, not to be making the "big breakthrough" but rather attriting Russian artillery, which is being decimated. Russian communication and fire control procedures remain antiquated. They are emplaced and organized to do preparatory fires in support of Russian attacks, not respond to random fire missions, and of course the fuel and fleet to move tubes are in short supply.

Bakhmut has already been effectively encircled. Uke artillery already covers all lines of Russian communication. Klishchiivka is high ground which affords visual observation of all of those lines, so now any vehicle which attempts to enter/leave Bakhmut will be destroyed. I doubt Uke will make a serious attempt to take Bakhmut. They'll bypass it and let the Russians either surrender, or exhaust themselves in breakout attacks.

Same cannot be said for Donetsk. Uke will need it for symbolism, and for the rail yards.

---

It's not yet clear that Ukraine controls Klishschiivka or Andriivka. They still have Yahidne and Opytne to deal with before surrounding Bakhmut. Ignoring it would be the smartest thing they've done in a long time, but the rhetoric from Kiev suggests they're about to repeat their mistake. Ukraine's best tank brigades (33rd and 47th) were slaughtered at Robotyne in the early days of the offensive. They adopted the attrition strategy out of necessity. They're now attacking that area with large numbers of tanks and again taking heavy losses. All of which suits the Russians just fine.

If you want to see accelerated progress, keep your eye on the northeast. There's no mention of it in Western media, but the Russians are advancing at a half dozen or so points and have crossed the Zherebets River into Nadia and Serhiivka in the last couple of days. From there it's a straight shot to Borova and the chance to sever the Ukrainian line east of the Oskil.

---

See Bear 8084's post. ISW is unable to visually confirm significant advances. As I noted, the advances claimed are not significant and Uke withdrawals to more easily defendable terrain are not necessarily a net-gain for Russia......

as for your sources on the Uke offensive.... Here's what ISW has been able to confirm, usually with imagery.

Ukrainian forces launched a significant mechanized counteroffensive operation in western Zaporizhia Oblast on July 26 and appear to have broken through certain pre-prepared Russian defensive positions south of Orikhiv. Russian sources, including the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and several prominent milbloggers, claimed that Ukrainian forces launched an intense frontal assault towards Robotyne (10km south of Orikhiv) and broke through Russian defensive positions northeast of the settlement.[1] Geolocated footage indicates that Ukrainian forces likely advanced to within 2.5km directly east of Robotyne during the attack before Russian forces employed standard doctrinal elastic defense tactics and pushed Ukrainian troops back somewhat, although not all the way back to their starting positions.[2]

Russian sources provided a wide range of diverging claims as to the scale of both the attack and resulting Ukrainian losses, indicating that the actual results and Ukrainian losses remain unclear. The Russian MoD claimed that up to three battalions engaged in a "massive assault" near Orikhiv, but ISW has not yet observed visual evidence to suggest that such a large number of personnel (a full brigade) were involved in the attack.[3] One prominent Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian forces used over 80 armored vehicles, and other milbloggers more conservatively claimed that the number was closer to between 30 and 40.[4] Various Russian milbloggers additionally made disparate claims about how many armored vehicles Russian forces destroyed.[5] ISW has also not yet observed a large number of heat anomalies from NASA's FIRMS / VIIRs sensors in this area of the frontline of the sort that have historically accompanied large, mechanized pushes.[6] The disagreement amongst several prominent Russian sources, who have generally tended to offer more mutually consistent claims about the size of and losses resulting from previous Ukrainian attacks, indicates that the situation remains less than clear and that Ukrainian forces may have been more successful than assessed by Russian commentators.
The battlefield geometry around Robotyne, as well as the force composition of the Russian elements defending there, offer important color to speculation surrounding the Ukrainian attack and gains. Geolocated footage from July 27 shows two Ukrainian Bradley infantry fighting vehicles and a T-72 tank either disabled or abandoned about 2.5km due east of Robotyne, which is a point that is about 2.5km south of the current frontline.[7] This geolocated point is beyond the forward-most pre-prepared Russian defensive fortifications in this area, indicating that Ukrainian forces managed to penetrate and drive through tactically challenging defensive positions. This kind of penetration battle will be one of the most difficult things for Ukrainian forces to accomplish in pursuit of deeper penetrations, as ISW has previously assessed. The defensive lines that run further south of Robotyne are likely less well-manned than these forward-most positions, considering that Russian forces have likely had to commit a significant portion of available forces to man the first line of defensive positions that are north and east of Robotyne.
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-july-26-2023

In other words, Uke has penetrated the strongest point on the Russian line, at an apparent cost of a handful of tanks & armored vehicles, requiring a full-scale Russian counter-attack.

This comes after 7 weeks of constant probing and fixing attacks, each of which sparked immediate Russian counterattacks (pulling Russian troops out of defensive fortifications....). During this time, Russian forces have received no reinforcements, no rotations, and their ammunition supply lines have been constantly interdicted, severely restricting available food, water, ammo, meds, etc..... By contrast, the Ukes are receiving uninterrupted supplies, regular rotations and reinforcements, and have nearly western standards of field hospitals and medical evacuations.

You should pause at this point and consider how much longer the Russian lines can hold before they break. The commitment of the Uke heavy brigades means the Ukes assess the breaking point is near.

---