Russian forces likely seized Bakhmut center, threaten supply lines

NY Post ^ | 04/07/2023 | Olivia Land

[ChicagoConservative27]

Russian forces have likely seized the center of the hotly contested city of Bakhmut, where they are threatening an essential supply route for Ukrainian forces in the west, British intelligence said Friday.

The eastern city is one of the last urban areas of Donetsk that has withstood Russian incursion. Now mostly reduced to rubble, the city center has been the focus of intense fighting for months.

“Ukraine’s key 0506 supply route to the west of the town is likely severely threatened,” the British intelligence update warned.

Ukrainian military expert Vladyslav Selezniov previously said that forces will have to retreat if the ability to get supplies in and wounded soldiers out is further compromised.

“The situation is difficult, the enemy is concentrating maximum efforts to capture Bakhmut. However [Ukraine] is suffering serious losses and not reaching strategic success,” Eastern Military Command spokesperson Serhiy Cherevatyi told Reuters.

[BroJoeK]

Magnum44: "Question: How can Bakhmut be a serious vital supply line when it’s been surrounded on three sides by Russians for months?"

higgmeister: "It was only vital for the Russians to lure Ukrainians to there death."

The supply road now threatened by Russian forces is said to be vital to resupplying Ukrainian forces defending Bakhmut.

Bakhmut itself is said to be NOT tactically important, that the reason for holding onto it since last August was simply to invite Russians to attack and be destroyed in Ukraine's defensive meat grinder there.

But the truth is Bakhmut is hugely important symbolically because:

"The eastern city is one of the last urban areas of Donetsk that has withstood Russian incursion."

[BroJoeK]

thegagline: "This feat is even more impressive in that Russia is out of ammunition and is using tanks from the 1940s."

It certainly would be impressive if it happened, say, eight months ago.
But the reports we see say Russia has been throwing men and ammunition at Bakhmut, World War One style, and all we can do is scratch our heads at that.
It makes no sense to us, except maybe for Bakhmut's symbolic value.

And, we might suppose, Russia is using Bakhmut to tie down Ukraine's forces and prevent -- or delay-- them from gathering for their own counter-offensive.

[BroJoeK]

cgbg: "How many billions has the US flushed down the toilet in this war.
My bet it that the US has spent more funds than Russia."

We see conflicting reports as to how badly Russia's economy is affected by the Ukraine war.
Those reports which originate in Russian propaganda say Russia is doing just fine, thank you, indeed, Russia is doing better now than before the war!

Reports that originate in more independent sources tell a quite different story.
One came from a Wall Street Journal reporter saying Russians were indeed suffering, and he was immediately arrested and jailed, seemingly for the "crime" of telling the truth.

But is it really? Nobody in the public knows what to credit and what to discount.
It does seem pretty significant that Russia is said to be emptying its prisons to supply cannon-fodder for Ukraine.

As for US dollar expenditures, they are so far, far less per month or year, than the costs of our wars in, say, Iraq or Afghanistan.

As for potential other costs, such as the value of us teaching Russians how to fight and win against NATO, those are very hard to quantify, I'd think.

[BroJoeK]

BJ1; "LMAO at all you Ukraine lovers.
You should be like me.
IDGAF who wins this war.
It’s not in America’s interest either way."

It is hugely and unequivocally in US interests that Russia does not succeed in Ukraine.
What happens to Russia in Ukraine, China will expect to repeat in Taiwan, and once we Americans grow accustomed to losing such wars, the world's 195 mostly small countries will become oysters for aggressive dictators.

We will not like what the world becomes if Russia succeeds in Ukraine.

[Petrosius]

How many billions has the US flushed down the toilet in this war.

Those funds have kept Moscow out of Kyiv for over a year and maintained Ukrainian independence. I would say that that is money well spent.

[BroJoeK]

A Formerly Proud Canadian: "Of course XiJinBiden has spent a lot more US wealth than Russia has.
Mrs. ‘Hairy Dancer’ needs to sock away a few more billions into the Swiss bank accounts.
Those Paris shopping trips really dig into the budget!"

So far, the totals spent for Ukraine aid are a pittance compared to the multiple $trillions of dollars Democrats spent on post-Covid vote-buying schemes.

Russia's GDP is less than 10% of ours, and Russia's military spending was already 4% of its GDP in 2021.
Public announcements from Russia say they will spend unlimited funds for the Ukraine war, so we might well suppose they've now doubled that 4% to over 8% of Russia's GDP.

Of course, that's still less than the US spends for defense, but not less than we've spent on Ukraine, and certainly not less in terms of our GDP, of which our military is still around 3% of US GDP.

[higgmeister]

If you had any comprehension at all, you wouild know that I was refuting what you posted as a bunch of bunk.   Joe Biden and his Neocon sycophants are complicit in the fact that they are weakening our military by burning up our resourses and destroying the NATO alliance by the mission creep beyond its founding objectives.

In 1949, there were 12 founding members of the Alliance: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom and the United States.

The clear enemy was the Soviet Union.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is a military alliance originally established in 1949 to create a counterweight to Soviet armies stationed in central and eastern Europe after World War II. When the Cold War ended, NATO was reconceived as a “cooperative-security” organization.

When the Soviet Union fell, the enemy no longer existed.   Since then, NATO became a toy for the Neocons in our United States, to feed the Military Industrial Complex and became a tool to control our indentured nations.

Now, hiding behind NATO we have troops in Poland, 30 miles from the Ukrainian border, poised to be an impetus that will start WWIII.

If you don't believe it, my neighbor's son-in-law has already been there to, RXE (Rzeszow poland military base).

[delta7]

Bakmut and Avidivka important- Bakmut, roads, and rail lines, without those the Ukies have to move over flat, muddy plains, in commercial pick ups….Avidivka highly fortified since 2015, the area that the Ukies have been shelling Donetsk since 2015. There WERE huge amounts of Ukie artillery positioned there.

The Ukies know how important both are, thus the huge amounts of Ukies they sent into Vlad’s meatgrinder…..as we are seeing, to no avail.

[BroJoeK]

Mariner: "And soon they’ll get to know the pain of rooting out/assaulting dug-in, modern forces.
They will burn through men and equipment as the Russians did."

Maybe... it could happen, but that's not what happened when Ukraine defeated Russian forces around Kiev, Kharkiv and Kherson.
In those examples, Ukrainian forces moved rapidly, panicking and surrounding fleeing Russian forces.

Will that happen a fourth or fifth time?
There's no way for us to know, but I would not underestimate Ukrainians, or overestimate Russians.

[ansel12]

Again, nothing to do with my post, except for your mistaken idea that our stocks of a few weapons are being permanently depleted, if that is what you think.

Factories in America and other NATO countries are being refurbished, new ones are being built, money is to be made manufacturing the ammo and weapons that we have decided are useful and needed, new and improved stock with increased production rates.

[higgmeister]

Just as I said, feeding the MIC that General Eisenhower's farewell address warned us about.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense. We have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security alone more than the net income of all United States corporations.

Now this conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.[1]

Feed the beast with your proxy war and give us a destroyed nation.

[BroJoeK]

Mariner #14: "By depleting resources and political will.
Yep.
Only a neocon could think this is how you position to fight China."

ansel12 #19: "However or whoever or whenever the West fights China, it will need NATO and the American military better prepared, and better armed, with a reinvigorated weapons-producing West and greater awareness and unity on military issues, and a lessened Russian threat.
All that is happening, and even under the liberals in control, it is still happening to a degree."

Right, or at least it seems to be happening.
I am haunted by words from Bob Gates and Barak Obama:

"I think he has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades,” former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says of Vice President Joe Biden in his new book coming out later this month.
Gates' assessment of Biden's boss is only slightly better, depicting an Obama administration with very murky lines of communication on military issues."
Atlantic Feb 7, 2014

"Yet searing, anonymously sourced quotes from Obama kept appearing through the race.
One Democrat who spoke to Obama recalled the former president warning, "Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up." Speaking of his own waning understanding of today's Democratic electorate, especially in Iowa, Obama told one 2020 candidate: "And you know who really doesn't have it? Joe Biden.""
Snopes, Oct 26, 2022

And those were before Afghanistan.

These are what worry me, more than anything else.

[PAR35]

the alleged 2nd strongest military in the world versus Ukraine.

China, Russia, US?

[BroJoeK]

"That must be why we gave up untold fortunes worth of military hardware in Afghanistan and munitions in Ukraine.
We are better positioned for the Chinese takeover."

I think it was said at the time, that all our really "good stuff" was being destroyed or removed.
The numbers for how much was left behind correspond to what it cost us to move & maintain the equipment in Afghanistan, not to their actual value as weapons today.

Of course, even one advanced weapon falling into enemy hands is too many, but how can we put a dollar value on that?

[BroJoeK]

tenmountainman: "With Milley and Austin in charge? LOL. Those 2 could not even withdraw from Afghan without getting our solders killed."

Just so you understand, they fully reflect the level of military and strategic genius of their Commander in Chief.

God help us.

[Starboard]

LOL! Good one.

[BroJoeK]

delta7: "The Ukies know how important both are, thus the huge amounts of Ukies they sent into Vlad’s meatgrinder…..as we are seeing, to no avail."

None of the numbers we've seen for casualties on both sides are necessarily believable, but historically, in a trench warfare situation, attackers are expected to lose three for every one of the defenders lost.

Russia's highly publicized use of prisoners as cannon-fodder suggests they are not having an easy time of it around Bakhmut.

[ansel12]

I think a lot of the positives are being forced upon the left by circumstances, which is a benefit for us from the Russian invasion.

Another example of the left being forced into something by the invasion that helps us, besides the better position of the West militarily, is the effect caused by the winter threat of a freezing and starving Europe which seems to have weakened the anti-energy forces and hopefully moved a lot of voters away from them, it sure seems to have advanced nuclear energy.

[BroJoeK]

higgmeister: quoting Eisenhower:

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes.
We should take nothing for granted.
Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can..."

higgmeister: "Feed the beast with your proxy war and give us a destroyed nation."

Sure, Eisenhower's warnings are important to remember.
It's just as important to remember that Pres. Eisenhower never said we should abolish our defense industry or abandon our friends to aggressive dictators.

And it's more important to remember that the US defense budget under Eisenhower, compared to our GDP, was four times more than it is today -- circa 12% then versus around 3% today.

So, if anything, we've far overreacted to Eisenhower's warnings and gone too far in the other direction.

[ansel12]

Some of the posters seem to be terribly upset at both running low on our military weapons and replacing those military weapons.