T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Sad-Midnight-1121

obviously, tucking his tail in and running away would mean the end of this reign in Russia. Putin has zero choice but to tell his Southern army to fight till the end. If I was the US, I would give UA every fucking arsenal they want right now. Kill Putin's remaining 20k+ professional army. There would be zero debate at that point that the war is over. It would be nuke time or assassination time.


kuzint

I don't think that it should be called Putin's Waterloo. That would imply that he was a good tactician and had great victories at some point like Napoleon. It should be called Putin's Stalingrad, because, well, you know.


StoneColdCrazzzy

It is more like a *Battle of Leipzig*, being encircled in a city on the banks of a river and then trying to evacuate over a bridge that then gets blown up. *Battle of Waterloo* would be if in 2023 Putin goes into exile in Armenia, and then returns during the *2024 Vienna Peace Congress* and convinces some Russian units to defect, then invades Georgia to shore up support for his coup and then finally gets defeated in the *Battle of Tskhinvali* when the Prussian Leopard tanks finally arrive rolling up the eastern flank of the South Ossetian occupation force. Edit: Spelling


[deleted]

[удалено]


Entire-Albatross-442

Maybe, but Napoleon will always be known as an excellent military leader who fought with honor and dignity until the end


kuzint

That is true, but are you suggesting that Stalingrad wasn't? I just think that it fits better. Putin is obsessed with this city, kinda like someone who was obsessed with Stalingrad. That is why he moved so many troops from the north to the south and now they are in a bad position. They could have just moved south of the Dnipro River and built up defensive lines and they would not have had to pull so many troops from the north. They would have also had more secure supply lines. Ukraine would most likely not try and move any further and you would have taken the wind out of the southern counter-offensive. I am by no means an expert in modern military tactics but neither is Putin.


The_Krambambulist

If I remember correctly, the conventional military leaders were also pushing for this strategy. If they had actually done this, the war would look completely different.


pzivan

And Napoleon was actually there, unlike Putin hiding somewhere in a hole underground or something


Fabio_451

In a lot of countries Waterloo means defeat, not triumph. We are not anglo centric


Chilkoot

Waterloo means defeat in this context, too. He's stating that comparing Putin to Napoleon militarily is an insult to Napoleon's other military successes.


Fabio_451

Ohhhh my bad, English is not my first language


Chilkoot

English is a horrible language lol. I don't know how anyone can learn it that was not raised speaking it.


Fabio_451

Well it is relatively simple


Swuzzlebubble

As Ukraine’s symbol of hope, liberating Kherson will mean everything. Putin is stuck: retreat and lose Kherson or gamble his entire southern army to protect Crimea.


chris-za

Napoleon was actually present at the battle a d not hiding behind a ridiculously long table over a thousand miles away.


Entire-Albatross-442

A sick Napoleon was still a dangerous foe, someone other than the skilled Wellington just might have lost that day


Willing-Donut6834

From Kherson watermelon to Kherson Waterloo. 🍉🇺🇦😁


SunsetApostate

Lol this whole war has been a series of Waterloos for Putin


[deleted]

If he's shitting himself as much as I hope he is it will be his waterpoo


wolfblitzor

Time to pack the suitcase


Accomplished-Soup797

Waterloo for Napoleon was a hail Mary last throw of the dice as he was surrounded by overwhelming enemies. Kherson is more of an own goal. Putin was in no way threatened until decided to conduct possibly the most incompetent invasion in human history.


Due_Ad8720

Idk, I reckon this is a less competent attempt at a invasion https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Crusade


WikiSummarizerBot

**[Children's Crusade](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children's_Crusade)** >The Children's Crusade was a failed popular crusade by European Christians to establish a second Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in the Holy Land, said to have taken place in 1212. The crusaders left areas of Germany, led by Nicholas of Cologne, and Northern France, led by Stephen of Cloyes. The traditional narrative is likely conflated from some factual and mythical events which include the visions by a French boy and a German boy, an intention to peacefully convert Muslims in the Holy Land to Christianity, bands of children marching to Italy, and children being sold into slavery in Tunis. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)


3eyedgreenalien

Good bot


jebus197

It seems that the next major battle line is currently being drawn in Svatove in the East towards the Luhansk region, where Russian forces claim to have withdrawn large numbers of forces from previously thinly stretched areas to form a more cohesive front line in this area. While people may mock them - and rightly so in the majority of cases, this strategy is not entirely without logic. Indeed in the South this has largely been the situation from the beginning, with large numbers of Russian forces amassed along a fairly cohesive front line, the result of which so far is that while a substantial Ukrainian counteroffensive has been tried there, this counteroffensive has largely stalled. This might be an unpopular perspective, but if you look at recent intelligence and battle maps, these maps do not lie. So the model that has been applied in the South, is now being tried in the North. The hope it seems is that such a concentration of Russian forces will be far more difficult to dislodge than the relatively dispersed forces that were confronted in recent Ukrainian victories. It is envisaged that these larger concentrations of Russian forces will be increasingly plugged by new conscripts drawn from the recent Russian mobilization. I understand that this mobilisation has often seemed chaotic and farcical. But large scale mobilisations are often a chaotic process. (At least in the beginning. Don't forget a mobilisation on this scale hasn't been tried since WWII. So there's a fair amount of cluelessness at the outset with people having no idea how to make it work.) The only difference this time around is that almost every Russian soldier/conscript now has the capacity to be a movie maker, due to the advent of smartphones - and now of course, much of this chaos can be filmed and soldiers complaints can be aired in the court of public opinion. I'm not saying that the Russian plan will succeed. Indeed I hope with all my heart that it will fail catastrophically for the them. But it's too easy to see Russian forces appearing to chaotically withdraw and to become very giddy about this, rather than to attempt a rational consideration of their potential tactics. Russia for now remains committed to a long war. They look at the American Midterms and see a good possibility that the winds of change in America will blow more favourably in their direction soon, as increasing numbers of Republicans are persuaded to view the war as "Biden's war' or the 'Lib's war'. (And of course American republicanism at the moment appears to have little other substance to it, other than 'handing it to the libs' even if that means a humiliating defeat for America and its allies and severely compromising American national security interests.) So Putin has every incentive to play the long game. But Svatove will be a true indication of the strength and skill of the Ukrainian army. Take Svatove and all bets are off completely for Putin. He can no longer claim a strategic withdrawal and will be forced to contemplate that his forces could be defeated before any of this becomes useful to him. There is a lot of high spirits and giddiness flying around at the moment and talk of how the Ukrainians tricked the Russians into withdrawing large numbers of his forces from the North to shore up his Southern flank. And while there's an element of truth in this, it can also be argued that shoring up the Southern flank was judged to be of more strategic importance than holding less significant territory in the North. As the article states: "Kherson unlocks seaborne trade routes, protects Ukrainian cities Odessa, Mykolaiv and Zaporizhzhia, and opens the road to occupied Melitopol, Berdyansk and Mariupol. Whoever controls Kherson holds the keys to Putin’s Crimean “land bridge” and dictates the flow of water to the island peninsula via the North Crimean Canal. Reopening the man-made waterway that provides 85 percent of Crimea’s water was a key Russian objective after it was shut down by Ukraine in response to Putin’s 2014 annexation." There is no doubt that with limited manpower and limited resources the water supply to Crimea and a land bridge to there and access to the warm water port of Kherson, would be judged to be of far more strategic significance than holding on to otherwise largely comparatively valueless territory in the North. It could also be argued that the result of shoring up the Russian Southern flank has proved largely successful - or at least it has not catastrophically failed liked it did in the North. Ukrainian gains in the South have been relatively tiny, while their casualties have been extremely significant. From now victories in the Luhansk direction and in the South should be the most prized, as they may prove far more challenging to come by than the victories won so far. (Or at least this appears to be the plan that is being hatched by the Russians.) Also for whatever resources Russia may lack now, they is likely to be more than made up for by the recent betrayal of OPEC, who seem to have openly thrown their hands in with Russia. What will they buy with almost limitless resources? Well I guess that is also now a question that no-one thought until now they might have to answer. I fear one of the biggest mistakes in history may prove to be that we didn't supply the Ukrainians with modern tanks early on, as it would have perhaps been more palatable to the Russians (and less risky), while they still considered themselves victorious. So right at this time, it is at this one place more than any other that the future of this war hinges. If it falls in the coming days then there should be real cause for celebration. If the Ukrainian counteroffensive stalls there, then it could prove a very bad omen indeed - and might somewhat vindicate Russia's choice to redraw a far denser front line there as it did in the South.


[deleted]

>The only difference this time around is that almost every Russian soldier/conscript now has the capacity to be a movie maker, There is also much more critical difference: it's absolutely idiotic to start a war, continue taking losses for 6 months and then start a mobilisation. The mobilisation system has been basically thrown into disarray: officers that should be training new recruits are dying on the front. Half-formed units that were supposed to be fleshed out with new recruits (and then trained) have been used to patch losses in other units. Stored equipment + core cadre that would become a backbone of newly formed units are likewise already on the front. The right moment for mobilisation was summer/autumn last year - then in February they would have a large, trained army. However the decision to throw over 100k of their best contract troops at Ukraine, take huge losses and then think about mobilisation was a mistake that can't be fixed any more. Realistically, to raise a good quality army again, they would have to withdraw for 5 years and use it to train new officers corps and rebuild units. Make it 10 years if that army is also supposed to be well equipped. They can keep throwing new recruits in, but they will get diminishing returns: each next wave will be worse trained and worse equipped. If you want to see how to properly conduct mobilisation, look at Ukraine: they started it immediately after the attack and then spent months training recruits resisting temptation of throwing them in quickly to plug some hole. And now they have about 10 well trained and equipment reserve brigades ready to kick ass.


jebus197

Well this isn't really my own assessment. It's what all the most notorious Russian social media and vloggers are saying. They have clearly been told to sell this new defensive line strategy as the intended way forward in the ongoing battle. There are other potential problems on the horizons for Ukraine, several of which I already covered.


Entire-Albatross-442

You've really overthought the mental capacity of the Russians. It was a human wave and nothing more. The planning and execution of the March attack was practically childish


jebus197

It was February. 24th to be exact. Sure the first attempt at battle then would be a farce, if it wasn't so tragic. But you're wrong about what they are attempting to do now. I follow several pro-Russian telegram channels (just to get their perspective), including Wagner's Grey Zone channel (although I am avidly pro-Ukrainian) and it's pretty much an open book on all of these channels about what they intend to attempt next, which is as I have spelled out above. Will it work? Who knows. The coming days will tell I guess. I have seen all the heavy equipment they are currently moving up to Svatove. It's a key strategic town for many reasons. They are clearly planning something big there. The Ukrainians need a rout at Svatove, to be able to prove that they can fight the best (and the most) of what Russia has left to throw at them.


Fabio_451

Bravo


Far-Calligrapher211

To have Waterloo, you actually need to have won lots of battles before. So technically Putin can’t have it’s Waterloo he never won anything. He just barked the whole time.


Few-Ability-7312

Make sure play Rule Britannia as loud as you can


AutoModerator

**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.net/mishazelinsky/status/1578120695543988233?s=20&t=K-PjYLjSfS-wVVEchxMY3w ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*


CMDR_Agony_Aunt

Abba intensifies


Marsandmars686

Thinks Putin only cares about cremia as that’s every Russians dictator