Hi AC,

I agree with you that it is very tough for the Ukrainians, but I think that the most dangerous weapons they are facing are hardly high tech. Glide bombs and remote controlled tanks laden with tonnes of tnt might not be glamorous, but they are deadly.

The unknowns for us in the peanut gallery are how much is each side losing and are those losses sustainable? I get the impression that the main objective of the Ukrainian assaults is to locate and destroy Russian hardware. I think that the Russian defences are still too strong for the Ukrainians, but will they stay so?

Well traditional military thinking asserts that you need a 3 to 1 advantage in troops to wage a successful counteroffensive, but its the exact opposite for Ukraine, Russia has an advantage in troops and weaponry, air support etc.

Really they were sending those poor Ukrainians to die trying to attack such a well established defensive line that Russia has been building up for many months. I've heard there were some instances of outright refusal by AFU to take part and / or deliberately damaging tanks and equipment to get out of taking part in it.

I think Ukraine was hoping to cut the land corridor to Crimea and kick the Russians out of the ZNPP.
I don't know how they were ever so optimistic in thinking it was going to go well.
Even I was saying 'pffft' to you and SM before it started.
Was I not?

'remote controlled tanks laden with tonnes of tnt'
Hadn't heard of those.

I heard the glide bombs are doing a lot of damage, as well as the Ka-52's and the TOS 1A Heavy flamethrowers with the thermobaric warheads, and also the Lancets, apparently a swarm of those drones took out almost an entire convoy of Ukrainian tanks and armoured fighting vehicles a few days back, but I haven't yet come across the footage of it.

Have you seen this at all?
Confirms many of the hings I tried to tell you both 12 months ago.

Putin shows African leaders 'peace document' signed and later thrown away by Ukrainian side
http://youtu.be/rCmo4o4qlB0
(Which is why the Russian forces surrounding Kiev withdrew in a sign of good faith)
Putin was never trying to take Kiev, he wanted to force Ukraine to the negotiation table, which occurred in Turkeye last April, but Boris Johnson went and told Zelensky not to do it, as the west wanted a continuation of the war, and the Ukrainian negotiator was subsequently killed by Ukraine.
You can look all this stuff up.

Sorry I don't have a better clip of the discussion.

Obviously SM is doing his charter boat thing on these inconvenient facts above.

Baldrick, (aka AC)

You haven't posted any facts only conjecture. You need 3 to 1 to attack an entrenched position not to go around it and are doing so effectively. Also, the attacking force needs 3 to 1 at the point of attack. The Russians are spread over 1000km. Entrenched forces need logistical support and the Ukranians are very good at killing tanks and support coming in on the open roads.

Russia has superior air power but its aircraft are not immune to Ukraine's AA weapons as shown by the losses in helicopters.

Russia is suffering heavy losses in men and equipment.

Russia is slowly but inevitably losing the war.

Hi AC,

I read that 60% of the electronics in a cruise missile is made in the USA. So much for Russian high tech weapons of terror, but the Chinese are undoubtedly supplying Russia with western electronics to evade the sanctions.

With the reservoir drying up Ukraine now looks like it has more opportunities to advance. Meanwhile the Russian army is struggling to maintain it's defensive lines