its simple…. russia with 700,000 troops on the outside of the arc does not have enough forces to attack and defend along a 1500km border…. they will be forced to pick what area they are willing to lose in the next few days.. kursk Belgorod Kherson zap or the donbas…

18 comments

1. Why just pick one? Lose them all!!!!

2. But the Russian trolls told me that Ukraine didn’t have enough personnel.

   Dirty Trolls

3. Their problem is… if they weaken any of the fronts, the troops there are going to be overrun. This is a fucking dilemma for Putin, and we KNOW he is indecisive, it will take weeks before he makes a decision, and he has fired or jailed most of the senior military command, his defense minister is an economist so everything is in his hands.

4. Yeah, Ukraine has the advantage here. Ukraine is relatively prepared for the Russians to attack across any of its borders, even having troops guarding the Belorussian border.
   Russia however…isn’t. Till now has not had large forces guarding its borders, or if it did, they were second rate troops who were probably not expecting to fight. This was only based on the assumption that Ukraine wouldn’t cross the border, for some rather abstract notion that Ukraine only wanted to defend its own turf.
   But now Ukraine has realised, to defend its own turf, it needs to attack into Russia to force them to re-deploy. And the best offence is a good defence!
   Compare the failed Ukrainian counter offensive. Masses of troops and equipment, only created a pocket, because they were trying to penetrate long lines of defences.
   The Kursk offensive had no (edit: minor) defence lines to go through. Like a knife through butter, they have captured 300 sq kilometres.

5. Hell, Pierogi made it halfway to Moscow before he voluntarily turned around.

6. How epic it would be if they did a fake referendum in those areas with a nice believable result of 98% for joining Ukraine. Let’s go!

7. It’s almost like the delivery of F16s are indeed turning the tide of this war.

8. Now, Ukraine has more bargaining power at the negotiation table.

9. I vote all of them.

10. This is some napoleonic six days campaign shit. If the enemy has the numeric advantage but is slowed down by logistics, you can dictate where the battles take place. Granted it’s not even day 3, but the speed of the attacks have been insane.

11. Ok, but the same things were being said about the previous raids in 2023, or as justification for the holding bridgehead across the river near Kherson.

    Yes, it forces Russia to divert resources from other things, but these adventures also divert Ukrainian resources. The costs and benefits should be carefully considered.

12. Hoping Ukraine can do the most they can without over-extending themselves! Would also benefit if they make the Russians bleed for the land being retaken (if it comes down to it). Feels like playing 5v4 basketball where the team outnumbered is going to have to make a decision on how to defend.

13. The wider the front, the more difficult logistics become.

14. Doesn’t take much to defend with fixed fortified positions. I wouldn’t count on many gains or russians loosing any area other than Kursk and maybe belograd. Hopefully they stop attacking on the adiivka front and give those poor men a breather.

15. The beginning of the end

16. Classic Sun-Tsu. If your enemy must defend everywhere, then he will be weak everywhere.

17. Anyone knows what’s the freedom of Russia Legion up to? Are they in Kursk Oblast?

    It’s been quiet on the Reddit news about their units.

18. They should take the Kursk Nuke plant to trade for the ZNPP. Great way to get the Russians out without firing a shot.