Russia Is Still Advancing, But Slowly. Here's Why.

Check out my book "How Ukraine Survived": amzn.to/47gnlEf. You can also read it for free by signing up for a Kindle Unlimited trial at amzn.to/3QMsBr8. (I use affiliate links, meaning I earn a commission when you make a transaction through them. Even if you read for free, you are still supporting the channel.)
For the past few months, Russia has been on an offensive in Ukraine. It has been successful in the sense that Russian troops have gained ground. It has been less the optimal from the Kremlin's perspective because those gains have come about slowly. So why is Ukraine losing ground, and why isn't Ukraine losing more ground? This video puts the current offensive in a broader context, and places special focus on the role of defensive entrenchments in explaining what is happening now.
0:00 The War's Current Tempo
1:06 Recent Territorial Exchanges
4:53 Why Is Russia Gaining Ground?
10:26 Why Are Russia's Gains So Slow?
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.
Media licensed under OGL 1.0 (nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/o...
By UK MOD:
www.defenceimagery.mod.uk/foto...
Media licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By Ministry of Defense of Ukraine:
www.flickr.com/photos/ministr...
Media licensed under CC BY 4.0 (creativecommons.org/licenses/...
By Mil.gov.ua:
www.mil.gov.ua/en/ministry-of...
By Kremlin.ru:
en.kremlin.ru/catalog/keywords...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
en.kremlin.ru/events/president...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/news/71891
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
kremlin.ru/events/president/ne...
By Mil.ru:
structure.mil.ru/management/i...
z.mil.ru/spec_mil_oper/media/...

[@josephfox9221]

my theory is that a slow burn war is easier on Russia. a constant war drains Ukraine manpower, but doesnt invite as much Western Aid. a slow burning war also doesnt send too many body bags home in one go. also it gives Russia the Opportunity to build up their military. so for Russia, as long as the lines move westward. it doesnt mind how slow it goes

[@andrewryanwasright]

I think that's a good analysis

[@SkyDiver-wd5oj]

I agree

[@JeanLucsNerdBrain]

@@andrewryanwasright Russia so far has played a very patient long game after the opening moves. they knew this would be a long war and have not been in a rush to escalate it despite what western MSM wants people to think. sure they COULD send a tone of soldiers armed to the teeth into Ukraine in a massive offensive but that might scare NATO enough to do something stupid. instead they let western interest slowly fade while slowly griding away at Ukraine morale and making them realize that unless they gave up SOMETHING willingly this will never end and countless generations of Ukrainians will never know peace.

[@boarfaceswinejaw4516]

based on footage from the war, and the amount of manpower losses russia suffers with its disastrious long sieges on deeply held defensive positions, i'd argue that it doesnt preserve manpower. in fact, if the amount of footage of russian troops without sufficient vehicle support is anything to go by, as well as the frequent clown-car tactics using apcs and tanks (where they regularly have more than twice the amount of passengers on them), russia's slow advance can be partially chalked up to a lack of sufficient vehicles.

[@Karlswebb]

@@andrewryanwasrightIt’s a horrible analysis. They are taking massive losses at 4 dead per 1 ukranian dead.

[@johnsullivan6843]

There’s a sports saying, “offense will help sell season tickets, but defense (or pitching for us baseball fans) is what gets wins.”

[@HavocHerseim]

you must be a fighter.

[@Chilicoach]

Heard this in basketball all the time. But the way the game has evolved, idk if it still rings true 😂

[@zjpdarkblaze]

there is also a sports saying that "offense is the best defense."

[@VodkaPandas]

Shut up, you all laugh when Russia is on defensive last year, lol.

[@bearlytamedmodels]

@@VodkaPandas putin isn't going to sleep with you

[@F.R.E.D.D2986]

Two reasons that come to mind: 1) You'll always lose land if you don't attack, WW2 Germany was still gaining land through counter attacks, even in March of 1945. 2) Ukraine has a shortage of ammunition, which is ultimately the biggest reason Edit: WW3 has officially began in these replies

[@memazov6601]

Have you reached day 2000 yet

[@MayankTrivedi2]

One thing that is overlooked is that median age of yellow and blue soilders is 45. It is not fighting age dude. Russia may have demographic issues but mobilising 300,000 from 140 million is different from mobilising same from 40 million after a lot of your people have become refugees

[@stevenkies802]

Two caveats: 1) If you actrashly, you can end up making things worse 2) "Amatures think stategy, experts think logistics" -Napoleon

[@IconoclastX]

No one mentions the fact that the troop numbers are so low. Millions of men were used in ww2 thats why the gains were rapid. If russia drafted three to four million men, Ukraine would be gone in a year

[@F.R.E.D.D2986]

@@memazov6601 ._. do you think this is the time to ask /j

[@Aqueox]

I would contend that Russia is intentionally taking its time, for the moment. Why? 1. Ukraine is having supply and manpower issues. 2. Western support is waning, and the US election is still months away. These two factors give Russia a certain time advantage, and they are simply "meandering" along, applying just enough pressure to keep Ukraine on the back foot and never getting comfortable, but little enough where they aren't losing men and material unnecessarily in vast offensives that may or may not work. Russia is simply fighting an attritional conflict now. They tried a quick blitz, and that didn't work. Ever since the initial invasion, they've just switched gears to attritional warfare with the understanding that Ukraine will inevitably run out of men and/or material.

[@JK-dv3qe]

and also: the longer the 'war' lasts, the more depleted western military capability/arsenals will become. they keep sending their haha equipment only for it to be destroyed in ukieland ('elite' stuff like the M-1 Abrams, the 'elite' Challenger 2, the laughable Leopard 2, and numerous french baguette equipment). as Sun Tzu said: don't interrupt your enemy when he is in the process of weakening himself

[@robertrennebohm506]

Western equipment is good but just like the Russian stuff built for a different war. Also how many times has each sides stuff been hit before its destruction? This is new warfare and the Russians are making changes fast and technical. The Russian forces 2 years in are a good fighting force and adapted to the new reality of this

[@Vatnikenrager]

The u.s had total air dominance over Vietnam and a 10 to 1 kill ratio.. still lost. If you think Russia Iran and north Korea can materially and financially out produce nato, Japan, south Korea and others you are on vatnik crack.

[@jdevries404]

This is actually a quite good analysis in my opinion. I would like to add, with the US elections in mind. A slow conflict seems a better option to not really awake Nato. In many nato countries ukraine barely reaches the news and fast flashy wins would put more pressure on nato to help ukraine. In a slow and painful death russia seems to get an edge while nato keeps being distracted.

[@Vatnikenrager]

@@JK-dv3qe Russia has lost 3k tanks and you are getting excited about nato losing 100..much wow..such lol. Meanwhile Russia is using ural's and t55 in frontal attacks.

[@joeytje50]

How is it possible to miss a 'Putin' in the long string of pudding, putting, punting, etc wordplay?

[@pierocaramelli1493]

better yet the phrase "little f*cker" is "P" "U" "T" "I" "N" "H" "O" in my native language

[@JaKingScomez]

It doesn’t work

[@Yuusou.]

@@JaKingScomez I think it was easy to put in Putin somewhere.

[@OdyTypeR]

​@@Yuusou. Well, the video is about the situation _on_ the ground... Can't wait for the _in_ the ground vid, where Vladimir can be Put in.

[@JaKingScomez]

@@Yuusou. do you talk or just comment on the internet?

[@jameslopes6918]

The answer to this question is pretty simple. Technology. The modern battlefield is saturated with drones monitoring every piece of the frontline. Any movement is detected and coutner measures activated. Defenders advantage has got to an insane level now that the Russians only option for overcoming a defensible piece of territory is to demolish the defenses ahead of an assault. Demolishing the defenses take a bit of time so they move slowly. Those 1500kg bombs do some work though holy shit. Even still, blowing up building by building in a city can take a lot of time.

[@Mosern1977]

Yes, the fog of war is pretty much gone now. And when neither side have air superiority then its going to be a very slow grind. Winning by destroying everything in its path seems to be the Russian tactic, it takes a lot of time and a lot of ammo.

[@mellohi6175]

My theory is that Russia is also using their strategy of destroying everything in its path as an opportunity to depopulate Ukrainian cities and resettle them with Russians. Kind of like what the Nazis wanted to do in Ukraine after WW2.

[@yugster78]

Exactly the narrator of this vid never mentioned this key factor. Drones and precision guided weapons have done to the battle field what the machine gun did 100+ years ago.

[@johns9969]

The manpower miss match is staggering. Ukraine has been depopulated.

[@zeffy._440]

@@Mosern1977 air superiority won't help much drones can hit enemy helicopters, AA systems can knock em out of the sky.

[@Srbazo]

Shovels, washing machines and now ninja turtles

[@dustintacohands1107]

Heroes in a half shell turtle power

[@GeneralMegrel]

You people keep using the same dumb jokes over and over again. It won't change the fact that tens of thousands of Russian boys are fertilizer in Ukraine with nothing to show for it

[@Theta90]

Reading this comment with no context is fantastic

[@larsrons7937]

Wait till you see russia's new combat fridge-killing burger on the battlefield. Video: _'Killer burger' robot created by Russian engineers developing hobby_

[@CensorshipGenesis]

@@larsrons7937- Gosh! What about toasters?! Toasters chips matter! LOL 😂 😂

[@Mosern1977]

Slow progress is probably because the defending side has too many advantages in this war as the parties currently stand. Neither side will be able to repeat their earlier quick captures/re-captures.

[@NikolayBychkovRus]

My opinion as russian: it is grinding, slow and steady. Land gains is unimportant at all. RUAF has higher hand in artillery and aviation, especially with new gliding fab1500, and can afford demolishing of fortifications.

[@Aurxa09]

@@NikolayBychkovRus snd what about losses

[@NikolayBychkovRus]

@@Aurxa09 uaf loses? Yep, based on UA news in legislation, they are in trouble.

[@debilman9065]

@@NikolayBychkovRus Careful now, you're discrediting the Russian armed forces by ignoring the progress of prisoner battalions

[@inf3rnis984]

@@Aurxa09 losses on the russian side dramatically decreased since the start of the war through better tactics ukraine on the other hand is quite the opposite

[@amymason156]

I think the lack of ammunition and the solution to it are together the best explanation for the way the war is going. Ukraine can't go on the offense without more ammunition, but Russia can't go on the offense when Ukrainians are using drones to break their assault groups. Drones are far better defensive weapons than they are offensive weapons, because it's easier to defend against drones than artillery shells, but it's easier to attack moving targets with drones than with artillery.

[@pretoasted]

Line those maps, bb. Keep up the amazing work!

[@VodkaPandas]

Cope, you all laugh when Russia build their defense, lol.

[@remyphilly5168]

​@@VodkaPandasshut up bot

[@2MeterLP]

@@VodkaPandas Of course we laugh when the agressor in a war of conquest is forced to build defenses against a country that is 28 times smaller.

[@VodkaPandas]

@@2MeterLP Who said it was a war of conquest? 200k troops was not enough to occupy all of Ukraine, Russia achieved it's victory when Ukraine promise to negotiate in Istanbul if Russia pull their troops out of Kyiv, when Russia do that Ukraine betrayed them and continue fighting with the western countries support, at the beginning of the war Russia comes with 200k troops while Ukraine had 900k active duty and 1.2 mil reserve, now Russia have more troops in the front than Ukraine, what Ukraine gonna do about it?

[@2MeterLP]

@@VodkaPandas Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Crimea say its a war of conquest.

[@RockMusicEnjoyer]

Russia doesn't need to advance when it can just whittle down what's left of the enemy. As for saving troops, I suspect that they're genuinely worried about full blown WW3 and want to save most troops for that possibility.

[@Dkamenev]

The current Russian loses from the front lint don't look like a savings strategy.

[@2727daqwid]

Edit: AI-generated TLDR: (sorry for absurdly long comment) - Nuclear war deters large-scale conflict between Russia and the West (EU+allies). - Even without nukes, a full-scale war wouldn't benefit either side due to the vast differences in manpower and resources. - Russia's justifications for the war are weak (e.g., Ukraine joining NATO). - Ukraine's best hope is to hold on long enough to make the war too costly for Russia, which may happen. - Russia can't give up completely, because of all the investment it has already committed. WW3 is not possible, because it would inevitably lead to a nuclear exchange. It simply doesn't calculate. It's completely different for russia to try to take on Ukraine which is way smaller in all metrics, and take on the collective "West", or even the EU alone which are multiple times bigger in most metrics but landmass and current military industry output (which could change in the future, if EU countries think conflict is imminent). If that war were to happen, saving manpower wouldn't matter one bit. On top of that, the EU collectively has 1.4 million professional military personnel and another 2.3 million in reserves. Russia has 1.3m conscripts (part of it is professional, granted, but not the majority) with 2m in reserve. Population-wise, the EU has 4x the population. I think you see where I'm going with this, right? It just doesn't calculate for either side even with 0 nukes involved, especially, for russia. Besides, the EU or its countries are not interested in a conflict - aside from some bullying smaller countries in Africa and the Middle East for multiple insanely complicated reasons. And those are rather hugely unpopular amongst the population. I remember at the beginning of this offensive/war putin said that he was worried NATO and the EU were getting too close to russian borders. Dude forgot about Kaliningrad/Konisberg/Krolewiec (pick your favorite name lol) and Belarus, and Finland + Norway... Not to mention he mentioned Ukraine would join NATO and attack russia - which would mean nothing, because NATO cannot help in such an event, and on top of that, try convincing the EU citizens to die in a war started by some dude in Ukraine. Wouldn't happen in our, or any alternative universe, absolute 0% chance. I bet some Europeans didn't know where Ukraine was on the map before the war lol. Like asking the average American where their own state of Vermont is lol. When it comes to the first part of your comment - russia does have positive GDP growth, however, that comes from military production boosted by the state. That's not sustainable long term. And they know this will swing the other way regardless of where the war ends and they chill with the production, or will have to increase taxes, and that can go sideways real quick in russia. I guess for now it's a positive outcome politically, strategically, maybe economically (though I doubt it since the land they are gaining is virtually useless, and will be for years to come). My point is, that there is a chance Ukraine may be able to hold for long enough for russia to quite literally lose any economic and political gain from all of this. A successful Ukrainian offensive of course would tip the scale way quicker, but that didn't happen, so the best Ukraine can do is to try to hold the line, inflict as much damage - especially inside russia - as they can and hope the profitability is enough for russia to give up advancing. The question then is, if Ukraine can give up the territory because 100% russia is not getting out of there empty-handed, that would just absolutely collapse the entire nation thanks to all the war propaganda and their historical character. Not to mention all that investment, loss of lives, isolation from the West, Chinese influence... All would be for nothing.

[@kevinc1200]

Could be Russia is not aiming at territorial gain at the current stage of the war. It may be that Russia is actually winning in attrition (despite claims on the English speak media) and is cautiously pushing forward to force engagement with the aim of grinding down Ukrainian personnel, material and morale.

[@ProcaviaCapensis-ts8ub]

I don't see Russia winning the war of attrition. I keep seeing massed Russian attacks getting hammered by mines , artillery and drones , for negligible loss to Ukraine. I also see Ukraine hitting oil refineries and now Russia is importing fuel. When it comes to an economic war of attrition , Russia can only lose against the West so time is not on their side.

[@heroes8844]

winning what? nato havent even mobilize

[@ilyal5712]

@@ProcaviaCapensis-ts8ub Then why military officers are so eager head-hunting for new recruits in Ukraine? You said 'negligible loss to Ukraine'.

[@ProcaviaCapensis-ts8ub]

@@ilyal5712 Russia has been actively recruiting mercenaries , including from neighbouring countries and countries as far away as Cuba as well as prisoners. Ukraine needs to match this so obviously Ukraine needs more manpower.

[@ilyal5712]

@@ProcaviaCapensis-ts8ub Same as Ukraine's international legion with Polish, French, Colombians, Georgians, etc.? In the latest law, Ukraine will utilize prisoners as soldiers too.

[@davidcrawley9479]

Early blunders in the Russian offensive have led to staggering losses of skilled troops. They have replaced these losses by mobilizing troops and sending them to the front line with limited training. The result is that the Russia lacks any real skill in its fighting troops. Without skilled troops it is very hard to make forward progress. The result has been that Russia has engaged in even more costly offenses leading to further losses of troops - and a vicious circle goes around again. Ukraine on the other hand has tried to preserve manpower, and its front line troops are now extraordinarily experienced. Russia can continue to make incremental gains by throwing manpower at skilled Ukrainian troops but this will make matters worse not better in the long run.

[@shurqeh]

Option three: Russian offensive is less offensive more probe and they are waiting for signs that Ukraine does not have the firepower to respond

[@tpespos]

Probes typically have smaller force offensive and much less manpower and material losses. Calling these attacks probes is the same thing Ukraine did by calling their offensives probes

[@abas656thegodemperor9]

bingo, that tactic is a favorite for russia, down to the combat, one of their strategies is to probe defensive lines and then make a spearhead to breacb and encircle the enemy forces

[@adam.maqavoy]

Not really No. Unless you'd want to Esculate War and get them even more Furious of & By NATO. Even I can Agree with The Pycckian President on this. *Why?* - Because less than 4 in The World (by Politican Leaders) in the EU. Are Against AI development.

[@miskakopperoinen8408]

Multiple reasons are given for the Russian slow advance in the comments, but I'd like to emphasize the significance of the casualties Russia has suffered in their low- and mid-level officer corps. It is their duty to ultimately keep the smaller portions of the army supplied, organized and moving and the casualties have been grievous. I am willing to accept that Russia has largely replaced them, but practical experience and institutional knowledge plainly put just takes time to build. I hence suspect that Russia does not have many formations that would be even capable of the organizational strain that a complex, rapid tactical maneuver would necessitate. Massive, set-piece strategic struggles like the one in Avdijvka are ultimately simpler to maintain and supply (While the demands are enormous, the supply chains can be organized to supply a single point and don't need to constantly adapt to shifting positions and uneven consumption rates), and provide even a relatively poorly-led force the opportunity to seriously hurt their opponent thtrough the weight of firepower. Personally I see similar aspects to WW1 in this specific regard; There, too, massive but highly localized battles often took places with the primary goal of grinding the opponent down , hopefully faster than own forces were attritioned.

[@jasip1000]

Progress is slow partly because drones have now changed warfare so that big troop movements can’t be made, without being detected and suck in enemy artillery fire. But then again, what’s the goal with the special military operation is it mostly conquering land or is it mostly demilitarize and denazify Ukraine?

[@secretbunnie2206]

The war will end when the Ukrainians run out (this will happen faster than a direct seizure of territory). I don't understand why Russia feels sorry for the civilian population and tries to wage war "carefully" if, as a result, sooner or later the front-line cities turn into a burnt-out desert anyway No one needs the population of these territories anyway. Most of the Russian population already lives in the part of the territory that was liberated earlier in 2022

[@andersgrassman6583]

Nobody seems to be confident about what the hell the goals of this war are for Putin. Whatever goals, they seem either unattainable, or the war has actually made things even worse. Like if Putin wanted less of a potential NATO border, he just doubled it with Finland and Sweden ACTUALLY having joined NATO. If he wanted a more Russia friendly regime in Ukraine ("denazification") - well obviously Putin has on the contrary managed to absolutely galvanize the Ukranian people as sternly anti-russian. Probably for generations to come.

[@markmarco6277]

Nazies...Hitler would love Putin.

[@LLachs283]

Listen to putin. For them ukraine is just a seperatis russian state that needs to be "reunited" with the "motherland"

[@sashap5747]

​​​@@LLachs283 Not all of it definitely. Ukraine is devided inside itself. Western regions with too much population opposed to Russia would be too much of a problem. In the East a lot of peope are actually proRussian

[@thespiceman9367]

Will I love your content. No brainrot, no doomerism, just straightforward explanations. Really scratches my itch of missing interesting college lectures. Thank you 🙏

[@LewisPulsipher]

Why announce a big mobilization when you can mobilize large numbers every month without seeming to change anything? Some suggest that this is exactly what has been happening.

[@user-ww7bz1cx2p]

Let's imagine your assumption is true. Realistically it is impossible to hide a mobilization even in small numbers every month. Especially with the claims of Ukr MOD. But We don't hear any reports about new mobilized people since 2022. Even gossips. I know several people who volunteered to sign a contract with Russian MOD. My friend who were a part of an annual conscription claim that although they were heavily encouraged to sign a contract but nobody forced them to to that. And my friend decided not to. And now they just returned to their civilian lifes.

[@Horny_Fruit_Flies]

Shadow mobilization for PR reasons. Mobilize covertly without announcing it publicly. Fairly typical of fascists states like Russia.

[@AdeptAnalytic]

Thanks William

[@PSEPI_Kabooshki]

The lines on maps have turned into lines-in-dirt

[@wppz7691]

Why?

[@VodkaPandas]

Urine lines would not be as strong as Surovikin line

[@GenericInternetter]

I think it's worth analyzing how much it costs (in all senses, not just money) either side to hold each km^2 of Ukranian territory. Then comparing that to estimates of how much of those costed resources each side has in reserve and can generate per day/week/month. I would love to see a video on that. Gaining territory doesn't mean much if you can't hold it. If you steal 50 bricks from me, you're probably not going to be able to hold them for very long before I catch you. On the other hand, if you steal 1 brick from me, you'd probably be long gone before I can even react. Strange analogy, I hope it makes sense.

[@JeRefuseDeBienPrononcerBaleine]

I think a better analogy would be the cost for a legal battle. Like, if you steal a brick from one guy and he sue you in court the cost is going to be much more manageable than if you stole from 50 persons and they all sue separatly. Or it's going to be easier if you earn 50000 $/month than if you earn 5000 $/month because you'll be able to last longer and hire a better team.

[@draculasneeze6681]

talks about gaining/holding (territory), then gives an "analogy" using bricks (costed resources) - wrong by your own definitions. 😝😝😝😝😝😝

[@we3d4fre38]

25 freedom distances caught me offguard XD

[@Bigvs.Dickvs]

A trench is also a line on a map!

[@Gametheory101]

#facts

[@2639theboss]

So is it Bigs Dicks and the v is just to get around the censor? Big vs Dicks vs? Like a royal rumble between Big and Dicks?

[@Bigvs.Dickvs]

@@2639theboss The Romans had no U letter, they used V for both pronouncing it differently depending on the letter's position that could be easily distinguishable to be a vowel or a consonant. And yes, also go around the censor, it no likes me.

[@aryanbhuta3382]

@@2639theboss It's fake Latin. 'Biggus Dickus' but classical Latin represented the u with a v.

[@SuhbanIo]

@@aryanbhuta3382 yes

[@gabrielbalbec883]

Ukrainians actually started building fortifications in 2014. Avdeevka was supposedly one of the best fortified towns in the world.

[@MarvinWestmaas]

And the only reason the main fortification fell was the single orc who had a sudden rush of intellect to the brain, discovering and utilizing the drainpipe to get past the main fortification.

[@mhhmsmfshsmhfh]

@@MarvinWestmaas Sounds alot like you're crying

[@sliftylovesyou]

@@MarvinWestmaas Funny that Russia knew about the existence of the drainpipe and Ukraine did not 😂

[@MarvinWestmaas]

I smell $ubhum4n$, they reek 🤣🤣😂😂

[@MarvinWestmaas]

@@mhhmsmfshsmhfh A Swede supporting orcs.... you must be a natsi 😂😂🤣🤣

[@aaronbaker2186]

It feels like too many people miss that not only is the Ukraine war tactically more like WW1 than WW2 (e.g. trenches) but strategically as well. Ukraine, and I assume Russia as well, know that this is not a war of taking land, but of destroying the willingness or ability of the other side to keep fighting. If you look at the maps and onky talk about Ukraine taking territory or Russia taking territory, you don't look like a serious analyst. Hence why William talked about the mobilization. Remember that in terms of land held, Germany was decisively winning at the end of WW1. The Russian strategy is "take land because we have no idea how else to make Ukraine stop fighting." But the Ukrainian strategy is "keep hurting Russia until they give up." It is really hard for Russia to quit without getting *something* but Ukraine (rightly) feels that if Russia gets anything from the second land grab, there will be a third. For Ukraine this was is existential, so they kill Russians and destroy industry in Russia until Russia leaves.

[@draculasneeze6681]

"take land because we have no idea how else to make Ukraine stop fighting." .... and "the Ukrainian strategy is "keep hurting Russia until they give up." Do you know what a strategy is? - these are not strategies at all.

[@aaronbaker2186]

@@draculasneeze6681 well hmm, in war college I think I was taught that strategy, as opposed to tactics, was "how do you make the other guy decide to ask for peace instead of keep fighting." But hey, what does the US military know about war? We are renowned worldwide for refising to attack anyone or join any military alliance, right? So I guess what I was taught in the US military as an officer was probably wrong.

[@friedrichzizek6700]

spot on but u miss how russia methodically destroys ukraine. They destroy infrastructure, they (slowly) reduce their manpower, they destroy ADs etc. This war is way heavier on ukraines economy and population. Its very unlikely for ukraine to keep up the fight for another 5 years. In russia, besides the poor who get drafted, the war is almost not existent in the day to day life. Infrastructur works, economy is still normal and most of the population has no risk whatsoever to get mobilized. Ukraine hangs on western support, which may stop one day or reduce. The economy will maybe collapse at some point etc.

[@FrenchmansFlats51]

A good straightforward and logical analysis that hits the key points. Thanks for avoiding the sensational clickbait headlines like everybody else on youtube. I would only add that russia might be in attrition war right now, since they have the numbers.

[@JerronHonda]

Very good work ! Subscribed 🎉

[@simonbowden8408]

Great video thank you!

[@earljohnson2676]

Great breakdown really like this guy he puts out some great material. You know your war that’s for sure thanks for another great video

[@romanbellic810]

What's the tree picture for?

[@BenjaminCherkassky]

I do miss a bit the fun anecdotal outros, but nevertheless another great video!

[@Gametheory101]

I'm animating a spicy one at the end of a video on coups. Should either be the end of next week or the beginning of the following week.

[@BenjaminCherkassky]

@@Gametheory101 Ooh! I look forward to seeing it

[@Timo0469]

Nice👌

[@hugoballroom5510]

Appreciate the analysis of the factors of Ukraine's resource allocation issues. One aspect i would like to see more depth on is the relative effect of taxing the Ukrainian domestic economy in favor of military strategy. The case in point in the video is the discussion of the issues of building both defensive fallbacks and counteroffensive capability at the same time. The issue was brought up only in military and political dimensions. In other words what "reserves" of human and industrial resources does Ukraine need to factor in just so that there is, after all, an economy to defend.

[@multimossad]

Some reports talk about almost unmaned ukranian positios in the front , the russians know it and still not atack those weak spots , very strange indeed , as if the russians were more interested in deplete the western weapons depots rather than taking ground , perhaps they dont want to overextend their logistics and are comfortably with a slow pase and short logistic lines , other very strange fact is that most of the Ukraines bridges are intact even while the russian various misiles and bombs can reach close to Poland , one explanation could be thay wanted those briges for themselves but everybody knows that if ukranians retreat they will blow the bridges behind.

[@shaun7142]

And let me guess, all of those reports are from Russian stooges.

[@darsdm]

Why does nobody speak about Ukrainian losses? According to your analysis, the number of casualties in 2023 counteroffensive was minimal, but Russia suffered huge losses taking Avdiivka. Is the game actually about depleting manpower?

[@viktorgv7937]

it may be so

[@GothPaoki]

If they were minimal they wouldn't have stopped. Unless you believe Zelenskys 31 thousand dead claim.

[@sircatangry5864]

Because Ukraine was not throwing people at trenches, due to lack of manpower. That's why counteroffensive reached so little, Ukraine had neither machines or people to storm the frontline.

[@user-cu1er2nt7v]

@@sircatangry5864 coping so hard with this one xD

[@kjj26k]

​@user-cu1er2nt7v Typical Orcbot, couldn't make sense even when it benefits them...

[@brucegordon9007]

An excellent article, realistic facts and conclusions. Any "new" army will suffer when pushed against an experienced force but can learn as well. Ukraine has been able to pick ground that has given it an advantage and offense is much more costly than defense. Russians seem not able to count equipment loss like our Pentagon whom couldn't count artillery ammo going out /stockpile, have been wrong on both Afghanistan and the fall of Ukraine and took 18 months to figure out how to write a multiyear contract. Can't believe we actually pay these guys. You have had on several booksellers whom seemed very misinformed but have redeemed yourself with this excellent article. % land gain and loss was especially helpful.

[@antoniogiannuzzi1256]

I think Russia advances slowly because this minimizes casualties. This may be the last war of Ukraine so it's win it or loose it, but for Russia it's much more complicated than that. They need to win this war, but they also need to maintain their interests abroad and after they win on Ukraine they must be ready for a potential NATO counteroffensive or a war in the middle east. Not that it will happen, but simply by being ready for it Russia strongly reduces the chances of it happening. Furthermore Russia's advantage is the industry. They can produce many more artillery shells, mechanized veicles and whatever is needed then the entire west can. By using those means to attack: heavy bombing on trenches, tank collums to transport troops in dangerous zones and so on they can minimize casualties. Afterall tanks can be repaired, shells can be produced by the day, but men can't be so easily replaced. No one ever won Russia in a war of attrition and no one can since it's the country with the most raw materials in the world.

[@miroslavdusin4325]

It seems to me that Russian advance is based on total destruction of the area they conquer so this way it can't be faster. Second thing is that the improved Russian strategy is mainly on the high level but not on the low level. Just hypotheses, my knowledge is limited here.

[@VodkaPandas]

Russian advance is based on the shortage of Ukrainian troops on the frontlines, just like Russia during Ukraine counteroffensive on Kharkiv and Kherson, Ukraine need to retreat and retreat again just like Russia last year, now the tide once again turns on Russia's favor.

[@LewisPulsipher]

@@VodkaPandas It's ammo in an artillery war, mate. Not anything else.

[@VodkaPandas]

@@LewisPulsipher Of course that too, what a shortage Ukraine is not facing? Manpower, ammunitions, money? Everything, that Country is not supposed to last this long.

[@creature2479]

They're not fighting for land, they're fighting for casualties and ammo as Russia has far more of these to spare. Think WW1, when something cracks, stuff will move fast

[@creature2479]

They're not fighting for land, they're fighting for casualties and ammo as Russia has far more of these to spare. Think WW1, when something cracks, stuff will move fast

[@sleepybokchoy]

new lines on maps just dropped 🔥🔥

[@fv5855]

UKRAINIAN OFFENSIVE A FAILURE ?? Ukrainian Offensive began on May 8 th 2023 until September . In 5 Months TOTAL Ukrainian Gains .......................................321 Square Kilometers Russian Offensive Began on October 9 th , 2023 until Now In 6 Months TOTAL Russian Gains ..........................................106 Square Kilometers If the Ukrainian Offensive was a Failure what are You Russians Calling the Russian Offensive with Only 1/3 of the Ukrainian Gains ??? How Embarrassing as even Rusian Trolls cannot Spin this ......Massive Failure The Entire World is Laughing at the Russian LOSERS as Russia Collapses 😀

[@ninahenricsson4934]

Hi all, just a question: Most of you post your comments under a signature. How do you get one? Where can I register to procure one? Grateful for your comments on this.

[@General12th]

Hi Dr. Spaniel!

[@curious_gage]

The problem is that Ukraine expects everyone to keep sending them supplies endlessly. Then they blames their circumstances on the reduced aid. Doesn’t Ukraine realize that the only way they’ve held out this long is because of the generous donations made by the west. Show some appreciation rather than demanding more help that nobody was ever obligated to provide.

[@SirAntoniousBlock]

Da da da In mother Russia you don't blame state, state blames you.

[@user-cx9nc4pj8w]

Just ignore that document the USA signed to get Ukraine to give up its nukes in exchange for the protection of its sovereignty and territory. And how Ukraine is destroying the threat of Russia to the west and to countries the West is required to defend. And how if the West had provided more aid more useful aid in the past the war could be over by now, but no, tanks from the west had to be delayed, for no good reason, an aircraft pipeline was delayed, for no good reason, and things like ATACMS, HIMARS, cluster munitions and artillery shells, aren't provided in sufficient quantities for progress. And Ukraine is willing to hold on until it can make a counteroffensive, ut its not going to send its men to die so that stupid westerners can feel that its doing enough to deserve more aid

[@ilyal5712]

@@SirAntoniousBlock JKF: Do not ask what USA can do for you, ask what you can do for USA.

[@SirAntoniousBlock]

@@ilyal5712 What has that got to do with Russian trolls?

[@misterpinkandyellow74]

​@@SirAntoniousBlockgrow a brain nafo

[@RogerAckroid]

Aren't the fortifications in Avdivka strong (it's on the frontline for the last 10 years) but Russia brute forced their way? In this case Russia is slow because they can't brute force everywhere at the same time

[@theedain]

Brute force, a misnomer. Russia attacked Avdivka methodically and v carefully.

[@Mankorra_Gomorrah]

Russia attacked the areas around avdivka and threatened to encircle the city. The Ukrainian command decided that the risk of getting all the soldiers in the area trapped was not worth continuing to defend the city and withdrew allowing the Russians to take the fortifications without a fight. The Russians basically did to avdivka what the Germans did the maginot although with more brute force.

[@draculasneeze6681]

@@Mankorra_Gomorrah i love how when given an opportunity people always plump for WWII (it's as if Afghanistan and Vietnam never happened).

[@SYD_EA]

​ddraculasneeze6681afghanistan and Vietnam wars were very different in strategy and tactics. That's why people dont compare

[@jannegrey593]

@@draculasneeze6681 What SYD_EA said plus the fact that World War is well known in the "World". While most of people Outside of US and USSR might not know the details of Vietnam or Afghanistan campaigns.

[@stephenking27]

I love your channel. It’s so informative.

[@boosterhuiz2779]

Such good analysis

[@mungucitimothy3530]

Considering Zelensky promised to be chilling in Crimea by the end of 2023, I'd say the Russians are more formidable than he thought.

[@jackburgess8579]

@@fv5855 >>"Entire World is Laughing at the Russian LOSERS as Russia Collapses" Congratulations! Not many toddlers can write so well.

[@stevemawer848]

And Putin would be in charge of Ukraine in 2 to 3 days .... Just sayin'.

[@no-bodymr6419]

@@stevemawer848 That was also said by the Western media. Invading a country with a size of France using only 200k is still going easy as forces would stress thin as they moved further deeper into the territory comparing German use 3 million troops for the France invasion.

[@stevemawer848]

@@no-bodymr6419 Putin was a bit deluded to think the Ukrainians would welcome the "liberators" with open arms. People want out of Russia, not in.

[@no-bodymr6419]

@@stevemawer848 the separatists in Ukraine don’t want part of either Ukraine or Russia, they just want to be independent from Ukraine.

[@okaforkosiso1474]

"We are winning"

[@wenterinfaer1656]

Are you winning, son?

[@dillipinaction]

good subtle analysis

[@KarlKarpfen]

The way it seems from analyses of Russian equipment losses and remaining stockpiles, it seems like Russia may actually just be starting to run out of repairable vehicles and as a result, the fastest an advance can be, is the speed a man can walk. Then again, the defender has huge advantages in this war and the greatest advantage of the attacker, surprise, is completely gone after both sides adapted very well to the current state of the war. It's just very unlikely for any side to break this stalemate of lacking offensive power but remarkable defensive power on both sides of the front line. It takes a huge amount of additional offensive power for any one side to break this tie, be it the results of western wartime production for Ukraine, Chinese arsenals flooding Russia with arms or one side with a new weapon invention no-one envisioned so far, it needs such a change to get the front line moving again.

[@LiberalCounterpart]

1) The Russians are learning. Painfully slowly, but everyone who wrote them off after the shambolic early days was drinking the kool aid. They are beginning to play to their strengths more effectively as well as correctly identifying Ukraine's strategic vulnerabilities. 2) The worst of these vulnerabilities is the atrocious demographic situation. Russia is also in trouble, but have significant leeway in absolute terms, as well as to a much smaller extent in % comparison. If you really need a reality check, look at the Ukr population "pyramid". It's a graphic display of despair. 3) Ukranian military leadership at the highest level has not been overly competent. The courage, skill and creativity of the rank and file + lower officer classes have been the key to Ukr successes, in personnell terms. Not saying Russian command is highly competent, but there is no significant advantage for Ukr here. This is becoming increasingly apparent as defensive challenges in need of operational and strategic solutions begin to mount. I see no signs of a Hutier/Bruchmüller/(pre-1918)Ludendorff type coming to the fore on either side, which maximizes the effect of material superiority across the front. Small caveat being that Rus may have found a Brusilov. 4) Static defenses do not win wars and the "Surovikin line" has been overhyped. An offensive along 7 (last I checked) axes of attack against a prepared enemy without significant superiority in manpower and equipment was never going to work. The minefields helped a lot, but it was SF units with AT + helicopters that crushed the spearhead assaults, which then inevitably got bogged down in small unit infrantry fighting for trenches and treelines. If you want to keep up morale in an artillery-heavy battlespace, especially one full of conscripts, you need to keep them moving. That is an underrated/misunderstood element which makes elastic defense effective. I fear that a failure to implement this basic insight is sapping the fighting strength of Ukr defenders faster than Rus glide bombs (which, again, are especially effective against static defenses). Having prepared defenses is better than not having them, but absent "software" adjustments, tougher "hardware" will not change the current trend of the conflict. 5) Political failures on both sides drag down the military effort, but again, Russia simply has a much larger margin for mistakes (plus a surprising number of seriously competent technocrats). People forget how dysfunctional a state Ukraine was before this war. That doesn't just magically disappear because they're the good guys now. They've done better than expected, but not well enough to outlast Rus if things continue as they are right now. Summary: the Ukr situation is not good and has the potential to worsen significantly in the coming months. Artillery/AA supplies alone will not fix this. In fact, nothing short of a massive re-invigoration of the war effort, both internally in Ukr and on the part of its allies, can turn the situation to a point where any of its stated war aims become realistically achievable. If that does not come to pass I suspect ceasefire negotiations for a Korea-style status quo along the line of contact will begin before the rains in October, after another Rus summer offensive. I sincerely ask for intelligent people in the comments will explain to me how I'm wrong in my assessment, because I very much hope that I am.

[@joachimfrank4134]

I don't think Russia would negotiate about any cease fire before the elections in the USA. Even if Ukraine would als for negotiations. Russia would wait, if Trump wins. If he does, they would continue attacking with new hope to grind down all of Ukraine. If not they can still show some openness for a cease fire at the status quo of the conflict line.

[@mikael.wilhelm]

You could very well be right, but the "Korea" outcome is just 50 % likely IMO. The other 50 % possible outcome is that the war keeps on grinding for years on end, with only minimal change in control of land. Until either party is totally depleted and gives up, which I don't see happening anytime soon. The reasons I don't think Russia will overrun Ukraine and force a surrender are: 1) Russia has severely damaged its military in this war. The huge losses of qualified personnel makes it hard for them to coordinate large scale operations effectively, and the huge losses of equipment makes it hard for them to store up enough resources for a substantial assault, since anything freshly produced (or refurbished) needs to get sent to the front right away. 2) Ukraine has proven itself to be very good at one thing at least: wiping out Russian convoys, whether its armored vehicles or just logistics. There is a tremendous loss of equipment before it even reaches the front line. This is due to the ubiquity of drone surveillance, and enough HIMARS and precision artillery to at least take out the most essential targets. 3) The war has expanded to beyond the front lines, for both sides. Russia is targeting Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, which will surely cause some hardship for Ukraine. But Ukraine is returning the favor by disabling Russian oil refineries. They have only had this capability for a very short time, and are already hurting Russia's economy. This will only get worse with time. 4) Russia _needs_ China's full support to win this war, and they aren't going to get it! As you may recall, Putin didn't dare to embark on this adventure until after he had gotten Xi to promise "limitless friendship". As soon as they shook hands on it, Putin acted immediately! But he was deceived... China will surely look after China's interests, not Russia's. And China's interest are actually to see Russia lose the war miserably and collapse, so that China can seize a fair chunk of Russia's Eastern regions. Which China _needs_ for both water and oil. For this reason, I fully expect China to stab Russia in the back at some time during this war, so they can be on the winning side and negotiate for some of the spoils. So my prediction is, the war drags out for a few years, Ukraine and Russia both suffer a lot, but Ukraine is held up under the arms by Western support, whereas Russia is on its own. Russia's "friends" are only interacting with it for their own benefit, like India buying oil from them (and demanding a steep discount! Some friends!). And then in the end, Russia breaks down, and is split in two. The Western part will be rebuilt under Western leadership, and the Eastern part will go to China. (Then history repeats itself, and the Western part prospers while the Eastern does not.) My confidence in this outcome is because I see very strong parallels to WW2, with Russia repeating Germany's role and behavior to a tee. Russia started out allied to Germany in WW2, but ended up on the winning side, and this time around China will do the same flip of alliances. Because China will look after its own best interests, and Russia is the losing horse.

[@jannaZX]

Russia weilding shovels with computer chip taken from washing machines are still doing a creditable job

[@ilyal5712]

Russian hackers are the best!

[@berserkasaurusrex4233]

Slow, continuous gain is safer and consequently worth more to the regime than a more aggressive push that might end in disaster. This is all about attrition and time is on Russia’s side. So long as they continue to gain or hold, they will likely continue the same slow push.

[@drstepan1078]

I was thinking you were gonna say its because theyre taking time to build good defenses/minefields and such as they advance

[@kompatybilijny9348]

Russia is gaining ground, because Ukraine is not attacking currently, because of manpower disadvantage. Russia is gaining ground extremely slowly, because it used up basically all replacement equipment and as such is now way more careful with it. Every vehicle lost now is too painful to bear, especially in comparison to the start of the war.

[@AmishMarine]

Wow! Do you really think Russia is running out of equipment? They are the 2nd largest producer of weapon systems and other military gear. They have enough weapons to be always at war, on multiple fronts, and in multiple countries just like the USA! Remember when the West was saying Russia was running out of missiles and tanks? The reason why Russia is importing weapons from other countries has nothing to do with the weapons. It has to do with moral support and as a propaganda tool. haha Wake up kid!

[@justsumguy8193]

They can make more equipment. Russia has a massive population and production base. Look at how many russians died in WW2. They will throw bodies and money into the war for years and years to come. They might end up losing 5x more equipment or manpower than Ukraine but as long at they win that's al that matters

[@VodkaPandas]

You can only said it was "slow advance" if you're not following this war closely, It was a much faster advance than last year, this year Russia gain 85% more land than the Ukraine ever recapture after Kharkiv and Kherson.

[@AmishMarine]

@@VodkaPandas Ukraine propaganda never sites how these mysterious numbers are formulated.

[@justsumguy8193]

@AmishMarine what annoys me is those that push the narrative that the war is going badly for Russia. Forbes does this a lot with all of their articles on the war and so does thos channel. Russia can afford to lose people and equipment forever if they choose. It's become clear that no one in the russian government or the Russian people are going to stop Putin. He can keep this war going for another decade of he wants and gain absolutely no ground, but if year 11 is when ukraine stops getting funded by us or if they finally decide to throw in the towel, Russia takes the whole plot. I really want Ukraine to succeed but this blind positivity is so foolish. And the twisting of numbers and stats to suit the narrative of "Russia is foolish, Ukraine is much better" is doing Ukraine no favors.

[@risaradocz5440]

Land gains more like grains 😂

[@risaradocz5440]

I hate my jokes }:(

[@EEX97623]

Ukraine is exporting more grain now than in the grain deal, and now Russia has fled the Black Sea

[@doodsrem]

@@risaradocz5440This comment made your joke better! 😂

[@andersgrassman6583]

@@risaradocz5440 It's ok.😊

[@kengsenchong4010]

good rhyme wake up...don't giggle....

[@Wack373]

how can you be so clueless and confident at the same time? like surovikin said years ago, this is now a war of attrition. territorial gains aren’t the unit of measurement anymore. all of this is just BS

[@robertfoster347]

There has been a shift in the military balance of offense vs defense. The old solution to trenches and fortifications was tanks and mass. Now tanks are easily destroyed by soldier fired missiles and mass draws effective artillery. Drone make tactical surprise difficult. Both sides have found small assaults by dismounted infantry to be most effective. But this prevents breakouts that can exploit success.

[@kuil]

Both are slowly losing, but one has less (it can) lose. Who loses it all first?

[@AmishMarine]

Classic war attrition Ukraine never had a chance!

[@senatorjosephmccarthy2720]

Kuil, That's a new and true evaluation.

[@Mosern1977]

Well, Ukraine has more to loose in this war for sure.

[@edwinng7313]

its basically never tell your enemy your location danish frogman qoute in a youtube video

[@samo6083]

I have read many comments here and listened to the video, i am surprised literally no one has mentioned this. The reason why gains are so slow is because RUSSIA HAVENT STARTED THEIR MAIN OFFENSIVE!!! Like come on people, we literally just finished winter ( that hardest time to start an offensive) By all accounts Russia will start their offensive around may-june. So anything before then will obviously be slow...

[@GermanTaffer]

Hmmm, letting the opponents establishing passive defense structures is actually not a good idea. The Surovikin line was really effective.

[@samo6083]

@GermanTaffer but they are not are they? Hence the small gains that are constantly forcing them back

[@CensorshipGenesis]

@@GermanTaffer - Although that's absolutely correct. The fact remain that Ukro corruption is such. That most serious defenses are not spawning. Due to the overwhelming corruption with many in there pocketing absolutely enormous funds! In the end, as usual, it's the low grade boots on the ground that pay dearly for it. Piling corpses all over the place. While they are not even reported so someone else continue pocketing for their so called "presence". In spite I say "Go Russia". It's honestly disgusting and revolting. Seeing the "small" people without alternatives. Bearing the load of #ZelenskiWarCriminal & Co!

[@vanjamenadzer]

@@GermanTaffer Yeah but UA are corrupted to the max and they lack everything they need to build proper defenses. The longer the war lasts, the more UA innocent soldiers who were abducted from the street to die in a trench all while their officials off shore accounts get thicker and thicker. Such a sad tragedy that is unfolding in front of everyone and yet the average western citizen is completely oblivious to the fact.

[@markotoshich7676]

I agree with your final comment. This is pure speculation with the nuance of bias.

[@johnnualda3946]

Let's not forget.. This is SMO.. It's not a total war.. Russian Economy is not on War Mode, no large Scale mobilization of over a million, limited equipment are being used... Any personnel reported casualty and equipment destroyed will only be replace but the total number will stay as committed... They can increase its personnel using PMC but that's it..

[@arell943]

Calling out the Polish colonel's perspective, the Current pace of the advancement of the Russian army is not a question of available living reserve or amount of soldiers nor Lack of equipment due to losses but rather a slow butchering of the Ukrainian nation and their army. Ukrainian GDP inflated more than a chinese one, Real population of ukraine nobody realy knows, Will people return to their homes after war, which homes i don't think so. Young people from ukraine living now in poland all i had spoken to told me they're not willing to return same as their parents. That's death by a thousand cuts, and waiting for right time gathering troops and arms.

[@AmishMarine]

Russia will repopulate the area!

[@MrSlim325]

No problem boy, americans will fix demographics with millions of indians and africans, just like they doing right now in balcans anf gerlnerally in europe

[@arell943]

​@@MrSlim325 Learn how to spell and read with understanding, then try to troll : 3

[@MrSlim325]

@@arell943 boy

[@captainalex157]

@@MrSlim325 dont blame the yanks for that, thats all on us europeans not controlling our borders, this dogmatic anti americanism is just dumb.

[@victorpaslay2062]

The real reason why russia is making the slow progress is in the technological advancements of this war. The area is observable everywhere by UAVs and cold-war machines do not work well here. Ukraine will face the same problem during the offensive and our gains will be slow unless we find the cure against the watching eye. Greetings from Ukraine.

[@pogo1140]

The cure are called jammers

[@icemike1]

Our?

[@Karifi]

Where's did you live?

[@sparkooctavian7941]

@@icemike1 "our" means ukrainians. 'Cause he's ukrainian

[@bacon9646]

@@pogo1140some of the drones are now using ai so that’s starting to not work

[@user-jr6sw9il3i]

I am Russian. guys, what mud? No. my friend is now at the front, he says that modern war is something else. The biggest problem is FPV drones, there are simply swarms of them in the sky all the time, and a cheap drone can destroy a tank for several million. Its also very dangerous to infantry. plus Ukraine is actively using cluster munitions. all this creates big difficulties in offensive in the modern warfare. In addition, Russia is conducting a positional offensive in order to reduce own losses, but increase losses in enemy equipment and manpower. In the long run, this strategy is less risky and will definitely be in favor of Russia due to the amount of material and human resources

[@Jacky-zt5ch]

- Mom, can we have Kaiserschlacht? - We have Kaiserschlacht at home. The Kaiserschlacht at home:

[@seanmellows1348]

Excellent work here.

[@GothPaoki]

So let me get this straight. Ukraine had an 880.000 army per Zelensky. In two years they lost 31k a ridiculously low number but somehow they're still on Def and their counteroffensive failed horribly.

[@IconoclastX]

And thats why they need 500,000 more men. Makes sense right?

[@AgentDoubleOSeven77]

Ammunition shortage, they can’t do meat wave attacks and roll up in golf carts like team Z

[@antred11]

"In two years they lost 31k a ridiculously low number" Did they admit 31k dead or 31k losses overall? Because if it's the former then that implies a much larger number of overall casualties (because there'll be at least twice this many MIA / WIA / POW).

[@GothPaoki]

@@antred11 he specifically mentioned those were killed. Didn't say anything about wounded soldiers. He did say though that there were 180.000 thousand dead russians and more than 500.000 wounded.

[@GothPaoki]

@@IconoclastX why would it make sense when You're alleging that this is so one sided? It would make sense if the Ukrainians were out of Moscow by those estimations. And it wouldn't make sense you force mobilisation when your manpower is basically intact all things considered.

[@The_Crazy_Monkey75]

Russia's slow offensive isn't brought about by bad terrain or mud or rain. I've recently been watching hundreds of new videos from Telegram and what's really happening is despite the Ukrainians having no trenches, they are still heavily defended and is always on the lookout for advancing Russians 24/7 using drones. Drones are what's keeping the Russian at bay, leading to heavy casualties, thus, the slow advance. Heavy casualties, makes Russians cautious with every advance, hence, the slow movement.

[@gromowigor9505]

Shortages in ammunition supply are key to it. You cannot effectively fight with an ammo ratio 1 to 6.

[@robmar7190]

Neutrality - peaceful people without a agenda playing one side against another’ all this would never have happened! Don’t invite a bully to your house that hates your neighbors!

[@meatrealwishes]

Russia decided to take ukraine right after its independence. This is not even their first war.

[@SkyDiver-wd5oj]

@@meatrealwishes Russia did not bother Ukraine at all upon the USSR's dissolution. It was us (the US) who chose not only to continue with NATO after the Warsaw Pact was gone but to break our promise and continue expanding NATO East. The closer we moved the Alliance to Russia's border, the more insecure they got. When they got wind that they'd soon face up NATO's warships in the post of Sevastopol, they took action. We simply did not consider Russia's security interests valid and acted like they did not matter.

[@angliccivilization1346]

Those gains are compared to the Western Front in World War one. That means 10,000s for each square kilometer gained.

[@daigakunobaku273]

William, I think, you forget the main factor, namely that on the frontline Russia outnumbers Ukraine roughly 2 to 1. In fact, the situation is straightforward absurd: Ukraine is vastly outnumbered, outgunned, has weaker economy, is less technologically advanced on average (everyone remembers Ukrainian Leopards and Russian T-55 and Mad Max MTLBs, but these attract media attention precisely because they are rare), and yet somehow the world expects Ukraine to OFFENSE, forgetting that just before the invasion Ukraine was expected to stand for about a week.

[@AlanTheBeast100]

Thanks for the quantitative comparisons - perspective is a thing.

[@robertnendel1993]

Russia's slow advance is likely because they are depleted, but another thought does come to mind - "normalizing the line of control" in the hope that some future peace negotiation cedes lands east of that line to Russia. It could be the Russians are no longer moving to "capture Ukraine", but are instead sticking close to their line of control to continue normalizing that line as some defacto bargaining position.

[@rextidashi1585]

Russia is out producing the entire nato how's it depleted😂

[@VodkaPandas]

Well, then Ukraine zero advance was because of they're losing then, lol.

[@KayderimGameplays]

@@rextidashi1585 They aren't producing new soldiers..

[@IconoclastX]

U.S. general just said russian army is 15% bigger than at the start of the war, lol

[@urubissoldat5452]

​@@KayderimGameplays They just drafted another 147,000...

[@prestencederien]

I think that the issue is that the are running out of minorities to send to ukraine. 350k kia from minorities is no big deal. 10k Moscovites is.

[@glintongordon6811]

Of the 2 armies is asking for 500k more soldiers and scraped the demobilization orders... It isn't Russia

[@creature2479]

It still looks like Russia is winning the manpower war

[@angeurbain6129]

You are saying bullshit and i guess you know it.

[@prestencederien]

@@angeurbain6129 My number is far far far closer to whatever kremlin has ever released. What was it after 2 years? 15k kia? I am sure you can call bullshit on that too,mr russian troll.

[@horoshkoaleksandr273]

@@angeurbain6129 what bullshit?

[@piotrczubryt1111]

Military operations are only a part of the greater game. "We maintain…that war is simply a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means. We deliberately use the phrase 'with the addition of other means' because we also want to make it clear that war in itself does not suspend political intercourse or change it into something entirely different. In essentials that intercourse continues, irrespective of the means it employs." (Clausewitz)

[@JoseTorres-ry9qe]

Its ammunition shortage and a lack of air power to project forward. Nomatter how you report it, the Reality always remains the same.

[@DawudSandstorm2]

From what I hear, the Russian military is very much hand to mouth these days. It's entirely exhausted it's active prewar arsenal of tanks and APCs, as well as its entire stockpile of ammunition. Once something is made, or refurbished, it's immediately sent to the front. They lack the output to perform a decisive push, but also are under too much political pressure to stop pushing and such burn resources at a rate that doesn't allow for accumaltion. Thus we get in the situation we have today where they are able to inch forward due to throughput and Ukrainian shortages, but lack the capability of performing decisive action.

[@mikael.wilhelm]

Good point.

[@draculasneeze6681]

bwahahhaa we've been hearing this for 2 years now, get a new song.

[@DawudSandstorm2]

@@draculasneeze6681 No??? I think the only think I heard related to that prior to recently was last summer, where Russians were complaining about lack of artillery due to counter battery. This is a more recent development.

[@kjj26k]

​@@draculasneeze6681 We have not been hearing this for two years, get a new lie.

[@tavish4699]

exactly from what you hear, but what you hear doesnt mean is automaticly correct obviously refurbished newer models get sent to the front why woould you want to waste new kit on some grunts that need to learn how to use it first and will often times destroy it in the process its a very normal thing in war that the good shit gets send to the people that need it too say russia is depleted of gear ammo and vehicles is absurd russia is the successor state to the soviet union and inherited about 80 percent of all its military you honnestly think russia can run out of all they have in 2 years?

[@Fenrisson]

This channel really makes geopolitics and strategy easy to understand.

[@MrMrin]

Interesting aspect of the war covered in this video. I believe Russia recognizes the advantages of defensive stance is one of the reason. Another maybe usually aggressor in a conflict (in their own mind) tend to be more offensive - Note here I am talking about NATO vs Russia.

[@reedschrichte800]

In WWI defense had the advantage. We figured that movement warfare in WWII made static defense obsolete. Currently, it appears that defense again has the advantage, since movement warfare has been so hamstrung by continuous drone observation and mines. Russia can obliterate any single piece of ground and then move in to occupy it. Though it's hard to see how this tactic is scalable to a comprehensive strategy.

[@janwitts2688]

Let's face it.. if Germany offensive training about driving round minefields is any indication of natos competence, then nato understanding of full scale war is basicly zero

[@Deltarious]

Since you asked for progress speculation: Attrition and logistics. The losses they are taking right now are *staggering* and it seems that most of the times they mass for a larger attack they are met with overwhelming counterattack from drones and artillery. Additionally Ukraine has been fairly aggressive going after logistics and really putting the squeeze on the lines. It seems like to me that this attritional style of fighting is costing them more materiel than they can muster currently. They do not seem to be lacking in manpower, that much seems sure, but we have seen increasingly bizarre and sometimes desperate choices in vehicles to lead attacks and to move troops to the line of contact

[@ardentspy]

LOL. You're totally deluded.

[@mikael.wilhelm]

" increasingly bizarre and sometimes desperate choices in vehicles" Wut, are you saying golf carts are no good as infantry fighting vehicles?

[@misterpinkandyellow74]

You are living in a fantasy land

[@vanjamenadzer]

"increasingly bizarre" by slapping simply steel shack roof tops on a tank in order to completely render FPV drone useless isn't bizarre. It's extremely effective and we can expect some proper advanced covers for frontal assault vehicles coming soon.

[@gamerlover9340]

one of the best progapanda west nato channel. i feel like i'm watching cnn or bbc and skynews etc...

[@phineascampbell3103]

"... Wordplay aside..." NO!!! NEVERRR!!! Wordplay NEVER aside. Always wordplay. Play word, and let slip the puns of war...!!

[@boonedockjourneyman7979]

You have no idea what would create “lots of resistance” to Putin within Russian society.

[@KenVet]

Always a pleasure to learn from you. Best regards, Carry On !!!

[@k53847]

The engineering assets you need to build defenses (which should be done by commercial construction companies) are not usable in the offensive. So the issue is that you have to pay for the work, not time or resources.

[@raoulberret3024]

Thank you for your analysis. Perhaps Russia moves slowly because they are logistically stretched, and their main goals are to: 1) fully control the four provinces targeted and 2) degrade (mainly manpower-wise) the Ukrainian army.

[@F.R.E.D.D2986]

Honestly, I'm not worried, you always lose land in war, it's just happens, and it will happen until the end of it

[@collinsoconnor5843]

Yes, kiev is also insignificant. We can afford to lose it, just the way we lost Bakhmut and Avdeevka.

[@paperandmedals8316]

What are you talking about? Please educate all of us as to the land lost by the US, France or UK in wars it’s been involved with, because you always lose land in a war.

[@paperandmedals8316]

@@collinsoconnor5843 “We”? The only thing insignificant is your post.

[@F.R.E.D.D2986]

@@collinsoconnor5843 Kyiv and Andiivka. Also, I'm not worried, because this is what happens in wars. The Russians have taken less land that Operation Spring awakening, when the German nation was literally falling apart, the Germans still managed to capture more land than this current Russian offensive has, and did it in one month.

[@F.R.E.D.D2986]

@@paperandmedals8316 Are you talking to me? Example from the top of my head: Every nation against Napoleon Russia in WW1, and pretty much every other nation for that matter Germany after WW1 The entirely of WW2 The Korean war

[@marcusmoonstein242]

Russia is advancing slowly because they simply can't advance any faster. This is because defense has a heavy advantage over offense in this war. Even at the slow pace of advance, the cost in soldiers and equipment is so brutal that Russia will literally run out of men and equipment before they finish re-conquering their self-declared territory.

[@alicaljungberg3742]

Good Copium

[@user-ww5mu2ot9e]

Please make an audiobook for your Russia Ukraine book!

[@openlyracist8055]

Ukraine is dependent on outsiders for everything, guns, ammo, and repairs. Russia isn't as much, so it's quite obvious why Russia can push as Ukraine goes through highs and lows in supply and both sides try to minimize losses.

[@Crftbt]

What is the source for the captured territory percentages?

[@debilman9065]

profile pic checks out

[@danielwalther5841]

The bigger picture shows a Russia in economic decline (lack of workers, e.g. Chinese banks refusing payment transactions, dramatic decline in oil production). Very important: the weapons stocks from Soviet times are running out and, despite the war economy, more is being destroyed on the fronts than is being replenished. And Ukraine is putting up this bravest resistance, even though NATO, Europe in particular is still sleepwalking and America's arms supply is politically blocked - damn it!

[@MartilloWorkshop]

Europe has done a lot. We could do more, but based on GDP Europe has done more than the US. Denmark literally wanted to give all our F16 (untill the US wanted to buy Argentina's allegiance with some of them instead), and we did give all our Ceaser systems. There's not much more useful equipment to give away, so the rest will have to be new purchases

[@kirrausanov]

Steiner... Yes! YES! STEINER WILL LEAD THE COUNTEROFFENSIVE! IT WILL ALL BE FINE! FINE! (trembling hands removes glasses)" - a line from Mr Zelens'kyj's favourite movie. * "The war has ended, not necessarily to the advantage of Japan" - Emperor of Japan addressing the nation after (un)conditional capitulation in 1945 * Mr Zelens'kyj's swan song. I am standing alone on the stage in front of the drawn curtain. The empty prompter's booth... and box-office. Deafening silence. No limelight. No applause. No flowers. Disappointed audience have left me a long time ago. A cleaner is about to finish his work. The piano lid has slammed shut. Unbearable pain has brought me back to my senses. The show is over. * "When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become king. But the palace becomes a circus!" - Turkish proverb * "Put him on stage and remove a ladder" - Chinese proverb referring to bad performers. * "There was once a comedian who killed people with stolen jokes and was hanged by his wits' end." - H.Warner * "How pathetic the jester is, on the king's throne, How stupid the people who allowed it." - Robert Burns 1759-1796 * Пане Зеленський, сподіваюся, ви ще пам'ятаєте старе прислів'я рідною мовою: "Не по Сеньке шапка." Незабаром Україна стане однією великою Малинівкою. Втішає те, що Європа та Америка йдуть тим самим шляхом. До таких політичних проходимців і невдах, як Рютте, Джонсон, місіс Траст i... дo Вас пане Президенте, приєднаються Шольц, Бербок, Трюдо, Сунак і дідусь Джо. Почнуться взаємні звинувачення. Hа зміну обіймам i усмішкам прийдуть удари в спину. * “Ukraine shouldn’t sign anything with them at all - and let’s just fight.” - Boris Johnson, Kyiv on Apr. 9, 2022 * "Росія хотіла припинити війну в обмін на нейтральний статус України, який зобов'язав би Київ ніколи не вступати в НАТО. Водночас «коли ми повернулися зі Стамбула, приїхав Борис Джонсон до Києва і сказав, що ми взагалі нічого не підписуватимемо з ними - і давайте будемо просто воювати." - Давид Арахамія, в інтерв’ю Наталії Мосійчук (25 листопада 2023) * "Former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has strongly rejected the claims that he interfered with peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia in the spring of 2022." - Kyiv Post, January 11, 2024

[@bacon9646]

@@kirrausanovspeak English bro I don’t understand your language

[@LordOfChaos.x]

This is stupidity. This war should end. No matter which side loses. There will be no win for Ukraine if Nato doesnt step in. And if it does ww3 is inevitable. Russia wont bsck down as it can sustain itself if u ignore the western propaganda.

[@kirrausanov]

@@bacon9646 Use google translator, bro. (For the record: I am a sheila)

[@_PenMan]

Time & Resources are on Russian side Slow & Steady gain Exposes flaws in USA 🇺🇸 side whereas,gives fixes required on Russian side

[@user-nh2to7im6d]

Currently a lot of company run private militias are being formed. Lots of volunteers will apply because they know they will not do frontline duty and get a superb salary as a bonus. In about 6 months time, Putin will sign a decree transferring private mercenaries under contract to be incorporated into the army. It 8s also a neat trick for tapping into the money at these companies for training these recruits.

[@dIRECTOR259]

This really is baby's first strategic analysis... Any simpleton can see russia's strategy for now is obviously deliberate slow attrition, because it is obviously in their favor. There, I solved the mystery. Maybe you could also peddle a half-baked book about that realization.

[@axioms22]

This percentage talk is super not helpful in any way lol, it's about where those percents are

[@Mosern1977]

They are in some fields next to the Russian front-lines in Ukraine.

[@joeblack1052]

War is a state of friction. Like trying to remove a rusted fastener Apply enough force and that fastener will move slowly at first then at some point it will be rapidly removed Apply too much force and too quickly then the attempt will fail The progress is slow because the approach is one against the most heavily defended axis Why not open a new front elsewhere to cause Ukraine to deplete its current line of contact to defend elsewhere? This could be resource related Russia doesn’t have the resources to open the second front without scavenging the current front and making a new front counter productive? Or it could be purely that time is on its side, they are using time to grind down Ukraine to such an extent success of a second front is guaranteed? Another factor is controlled escalation where moving too fast could elicit a NATO intervention and escalate the war. So the strategy is to prevail with minimal escalation . Ukraine and its NATO backers have been trying to get Russia to escalate the conflict via provocation. Russia mostly has resisted.

[@ownerpeasant]

I think you speak sense. I was just thinking of what happened when Iran looked like overwhelming Iraq. The USA handlers encouraged Hussein to use poisonous gas to repel them and everything became worse for all involved. On a side note any potential leader of a future Ruthenia ( a landlocked nation full of hate for Russia, people from the religion of the leader who dragged them into this and the liberal democracies that let them down )might want to think upon what happened to Saddam when the USA had no further use for him.

[@chrishooge3442]

UKR didn't need to get to the Azov coastline. They only needed to sever the East-West railroad lines. That meant progressing East of Tokmak. That's the only rails connecting Russia's holding in Ukraine East to West.

[@angeurbain6129]

The thing is that it is not going to happen....

[@mitchyoung93]

They didnt even make it out of gray zone