Kremlin propaganda raises this claim since quite some time, that wepaons dleivered end up on the internaitonbal black market, they claim that to discourage the West to send further weapons to Ukraine. But so far there is no sign and evidence for heavy weapons being smuggled out of Ukraine, say the Europeans as well as Frontex as well as American authorities.
When the war ends -
then it is one needs to have close eyes on these weapons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dargo
Total territory occupied by Russia at some point since Feb. 24: 54,000 square miles. - Total territory reclaimed by Ukraine since Feb. 24: 29,000. 54% of total territory occupied by Russia.
- Currently occupied by Russia: 25,000.
|
Thats creative counting. The antidot is to look at this animated day-by-day animation on the maps.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...e_animated.gif
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/F...f_Ukraine.svg#
The animation covers 2022, not 2023. But ther ehave not been dramatic changes in 2023. Things turned static last winter. Movement came to a crawl.
Russia won a lot of territory in the northern Kyiv region and at Charkiv at the beginning of their invasion, additional to the alrrady occupied territories they held since years, including crimea, yes, they had to withdraw at Kyiv, that is true, but this was - OVER ONE YEAR AGO.
They lost some territory in September 2022 at Charkiv, and in November at Cherson, watch the animated maps.
But the rest of the south-eastern territory the Russians hold, they hold since over one year, in parts since years, and that front is more or less static and we have not seen major gains by Ukraine since then. All this talking of that Ukraine won back half of the occupied territories gives the impression that the situation in the current - since over one year "current" - frontline in the south-east is changing, is seeing massive terioptiral losses by Russia. But that is not the case. Its more a reference to something that happened in the first month of the war, one and a half year ago already.
The claim of from 54000 to 25000 sqm occupied territory only lives of events that date back to the first chatoic month of Russias beginning of the invasion, and then the Ukrainian offensive last autumn that gained ground at Cherson and Charkiv.
The propaganda here tries to sell the public cold stale water from last year as freshly brewed coffee.
Watch that animated map and watch the dates in the top left corner.
###########################
new post
###########################
A comprehensive description of the situation and an outlook on the foreseeable future. There is no reason for optimism. None at all. Western governments continue to bury their heads in the sand and talk themselves out of the situation.
https://www-achgut-com.translate.goo..._x_tr_pto=wapp
Quote:
(...)
Nevertheless, it would be fatal to base any serious military planning on the narrative of the success of Russia's own operations, which is addressed to the Western media. The changes that can currently be observed in Russian strategy are too explosive. Whereas since the beginning of June Moscow's troops have limited themselves to isolated counterattacks by smaller units, the Russian attacks are now being carried out in concert on various sections of the front. The number of forces involved is also steadily increasing.
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Russian General Staff apparently no longer considers the Ukrainian attack potential to be strong enough to carry out substantial attacks on several sections of the front. Instead, it seems to assume that Kiev's pressures will be concentrated only in the south and the Bachmut area. This, in turn, makes it much easier for him to plan major counteroffensives and execute them at the right moment. Anyone who wants to adequately grasp the current state of the war must take into account the fact that Ukraine's summer offensive is not a unified operation, as one is actually accustomed to in wars. Instead, it consists of a series of local advances, each of which has taken place at different sections of the front.
This is accompanied by the fact that none of these offensive efforts pursued far-reaching strategic goals. Instead of the successive execution of a general plan, a daily changing scanning of the front could be observed. This was done with the intention of identifying suitable weak points for possible breakthroughs. However, this did not have a significant effect on the course of the war. Instead of a conflict defined by few but comprehensive battles, we are dealing with a war of attrition in Ukraine. Both sides aim to deplete the enemy's reserves by the end of the summer. Accordingly, as much of the enemy's equipment and personnel as possible is to be destroyed.
As soon as there are signs of a significant weakening of the other side in these areas, the own forces can be combined for a sweeping attack. At least that is the calculation. Whether the necessary capacities will still be available in four to six weeks is currently completely unclear.
(...)
|
It is understandable that Selenski is trying to spread optimism, it is his job to support the morale of the troops and keep the population rallying around their flag. But we in the West must not believe it, it is propaganda, just as the Russian side's comments are propaganda.
Things turn against Ukraine more and more. It gets destroyed more day by day, and its military does not find a recipe (= does not have the means to break up the Russian lines:
Quote:
(...)
The German media recently reported that Ukraine had successfully operated on three different fronts. This has given the impression that the liberation of the country is progressing steadily. However, as a look at the main focal points of the fighting shows, this is not the case. In the following, the southern front and the Bachmut area will be examined.
In the south, where the bulk of the fighting has taken place in recent weeks, Ukrainian forces are still trying to break through the five to six kilometre wide strip separating their positions from the first Russian defence lines. As has been described several times, this grey zone is littered with minefields and features sporadic Russian anti-tank defences as well as closely packed garrisons in the villages located there. Six weeks after the start of Kiev's offensive, this area has still not been brought under control. This is bad in that it should actually be the deployment area for larger operations in the southern direction. Conversely, this means that as long as the grey zone is not completely cleared, there can be no talk of further advances.
(...)
|