One of the most interesting tweets of the last day, part of a thread by a US Senator after a confidential briefing on the situation in Ukraine. If accurate, this information shows the disaster Russia has gotten itself into.
First, the assumption is that it will take 'weeks' to surround Kyiv and cut it off. If thats right, thats two more weeks for the sanctions to start grinding down the Russian economy and for Ukrainian armed forces to be reinforced and attrit the Russian invasion column.
Second, then spending weeks surrounding Kyiv (and btw, we need to be very careful about using such words, we dont know how effective the Russian military has been in Ukraine operating off the roads), the expectation is for 'street to street' combat in a city of 3 million people
Moreover, street to street fighting after the Ukrainians have had weeks to prepare and reinforce defenses. Can Russia take and level Kyiv, probably, but the cost could be immense--'long and bloody'.
And if this analysis is right. this protracted campaign of surrounding Kyiv and long and bloody combat will take place while the Russian economy contracts.
And then what? The Russians level Kyiv, kills masses of people, have their military degraded, and are running of out money. What's their strategy? Permanent occupation and war--considering most of Ukraine isnt under their control and the Ukrainians have become their mortal enemy?
if @ChrisMurphyCT is accurately describing the Russian plan for Kyiv, it looks to be a catastrophe--for Russia as well as Ukraine.
If this U.K. MOD summary is right the forecast of the Russians needing ‘weeks’ to encircle Kyiv looks very plausible
US/U.K. intelligence, which has been very accurate so far is presenting a consistent picture of an frustrated and bitter dictator, in charge of a misfiring military campaign who looks increasingly likely to favour extreme violence. nbcnews.com/investigations…
Looks like we might end up with the large encirclement and street by street fighting. What a catastrophe this would be

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Phillips P. OBrien

Phillips P. OBrien Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @PhillipsPOBrien

Mar 2
Been trying to get my head around what is happening in the Ukrainian War, as it represents something different than we have seen before. This is my first group of thoughts, so probably deeply flawed, but I think what we are seeing should be called: Semi-Symmetric Warfare.
It’s not a counter insurgency/insurgency war, though it is between what would be thought of as asymmetric forces. However what we seen to be seeing is an effort by the Ukrainians to erase the asymmetry. In many ways very successfully so far.
War has certainly become even more technological in the last century, and that has led to problems that the Russians are experiencing. The most advanced systems are actually very complex. Requiring great expertise, flexibility, advanced training and in some ways decentralisation
Read 12 tweets
Mar 1
I was wondering when these arguments were going to be made, and they are actually interesting. So much of Putin's (and other people's views) of Russian military capabilities have come out of the supposed dominant role played by the USSR in defeating Nazi Germany
There has even been talk of a law to ban the downgrading of Soviet contribution to victory in the war. This view of Soviet military prowess existed through the Cold War.
One of the key elements of the revisionist critique of the Cold War was that because the USSR did the most to defeat Nazi Germany, Stalin was basically owed a buffer zone in eastern Europe.
Read 9 tweets
Feb 28
At some point those who talk about a Russian strategy to win this war have to stand back and understand there is none, beyond the permanent occupation of Ukraine which is far beyond the economic capabilities of its crippled economy. Russia has lost the war.
The true impact of the power of Ukrainian resistance and the extraordinary reaction of NATO and EU give Russia no military option, except I suppose a full nuclear exchange.
For instance, there is all the talk of Russia recalibrating it’s disastrous strategy and going for a large slice of Eastern Ukraine and a land bridge to Crimea. Sounds really clever: unless you realise they can’t hold it for long as there economy tanks and the Ukrainians fight.
Read 11 tweets
Feb 27
Retweeting this because it provides the basic lens for understanding where we are and why we are getting the nuclear threats from Putin. It’s really all they have.
There has been a significant overestimation of Russian military capabilities for years, based partly on a think tank culture that seemed to be fascinated by Russia’s upgrading or different pieces of equipment. That plus Putin’s boasting created a dangerous situation…
Where both he and many outside spoke of the Russian Army as if it could easily crush Ukraine (and why many were arguing that Ukraine should be handed over). The problem is Putin believed his own propaganda: partly I imagine because he surrounded himself with yes men
Read 6 tweets
Feb 27
This move by a truly desperate man rather undermines the claims of those in the last few days that the war really wasn’t going badly for Russia. You don’t do this if you have a reasonable path to victory. It seems to be going as badly in reality as it seemed outwardly.
Waiting very much for the Chinese Government’s next statement
For what it’s worth, outwardly the White House does not seem too worried.
Read 7 tweets
Feb 27
A short tweet thread on the most interesting comparisons to Putin's strategic disaster in Ukraine. It has two parallels worth discussing. 1) Stalin's decision to attack Finland in 1939 and 2) Mussolini's decision to invade Greece in 1940.
Both have interesting parallels to what Putin has done. In both cases Stalin and Mussolini created echo chambers where their advisers told them only what they wanted to believe, and in each case it was that the Finns and Greeks would be a walkover.
Both Stalin and Mussolini were convinced they would overrun their targets in a few days, maybe two weeks. They talked themselves into believing that their enemies were divided and weak, and actually would almost welcome their conquerors.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(