As things are moving fast on the Kherson front I drew up a few maps to explain the situation.
A short thread🧵:
In Kherson the russians hold a sizeable bridgehead on the right bank of the Dnipro river (shaded red), which could only be supplied by two bridges, one 1/n
just a bit North of Kherson and the other over the dam at Nova Kakhovka (purple pentagons).
Since the arrival of M142 HIMARS both crossing have been pounded heavily by Ukrainian forces.
Since August the Antonovsky bridge near Kherson is impassable for vehicles (photo), while 2/n
the dam at Nova Kakhovka is still passable for trucks, but not heavy vehicles (photo).
Over the last month Ukraine has been wearing the russian forces in Kherson down: through artillery fire, constant probing attacks, drone attacks, and by destroying their ammo and supplies. 3/n
russia brought in pontoons to supply its forces in the South near Kherson (photo), but thanks to HIMARS Ukraine has been hitting and sinking these pontoons.
Now Ukraine went on the offensive in the North and quickly overran the starving, demoralized russian forces there. 4/n
This is the same map as in tweet 1, but seeing this map makes it easier to understand Ukraine's initial attacks (blue arrows):
One attack pierced the russian line near the Dnipro, using the 5 km wide river to cover its eastern flank. At the same time Ukrainian troops attacked 5/n
from their Inhulets bridgehead - thus fixing the russians forces there in place.
Meeting little resistance Ukrainian forces pushed South to Dudchany. This meant that the russian troops still holding the front in the North are now at risk of being encircled. The latest news
6/n
indicate that these russians are already fleeing from there (red arrows).
Kherson is steppe = a flat landscape with some thin treelines as only cover. There are no natural barriers, which makes it impossible for the russians to set up an improvised defensive line.
7/n
The russians can't stop retreating until the next natural barrier: either the Dnipro river or the Inhulets river
Retreating over the Dnipro Nova Kakhovka would make more sense for the russians, as
(Photo of the landscape in northern Kherson - ideal armored warfare country) 8/n
here their trucks and light vehicles can still cross and once on the left bank the russians could set up a defensive line to secure the rear of their forces fighting in Zaporizhzhia.
The other option is to retreat South to the Inhulets river (blue line). 9/n
Retreating to the Inhulets would be what a complete moron does... so the russians will do it.
Let's look again at the map with the second phase of the operation in Kherson: the russians retreat either over the Nova Kakhovka dam or over the Inhulets river: 10/n
if they retreat over the dam they will have to leave all their heavy vehicles behind, if they retreat over the Inhulets they will have to abandon most of their vehicles for lack of fuel.
And if the russians retreat over the Inhulets, the Ukrainians can cross the Dnipro and
11/n
establish a bridgehead on the left bank, from which they can attack towards Crimea and Melitopol. At Kakhovka they can also cut the water to Crimea.
In short the russians only have bad options (putin the "strategic genius" at it again).
Some russians will flee over the
12/n
Nova Kakhovka dam, but most will retreat over the Inhulets... and as said that's the most moronic option, because then the russians there will be boxed in by Ukrainian troops from three sides, with M777 howitzers able to hit almost every spot, and 13/n
AHS Krab, PzH 2000, Zuzana 2 and CAESAR able to hit every spot. And the only supply line will be pontoons, whose landing spots on both sides of the Dnipro are in Ukrainian artillery range.
Retreating over the Inhulets is retreating into a death trap. Once Ukrainian M777 can
14/n
hit the pontoons no ammo, no fuel, no food - nothing will reach the 15,000 russians stuck there. It's starve to death or freeze to death or surrender for them.
And they can't flee across the Antonovsky bridge as Ukrainian spotters will see them & artillery will shred them.
15/n
And in fall/winter they can't swim across the 1 km wide Dnipro river with its freezing water, as that would mean death by hypothermia.
putin just annexed Kherson, so he refuses to give it up... which means he has doomed all the russian troops there to death.
16/n
This is a textbook example how a smart, capable, flexible, motivated army can use terrain, enemy incompetence, and operational art to beat a cretinously led army.
We're gonna see more of this, because putin is a moron and General Zaluzhnyi is a genius.
17/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Of course russia can quickly seize the Suwałki Gap and cut of the Baltics from the rest of NATO... but have you had a look at Kaliningrad's border and the flat dry country beyond?
There are 9 Polish brigades in that area (and 11 in reserve, with 4 more forming). Sure russia 1/5
could move 50,000+ men to Kaliningrad to secure the border or build a defence line along the Pregoła river... but those need to be supplied from Belarus, which also is easily invaded unless russia sends 50,000+ troops to secure its flank there. A buildup of 200,000+ russian
2/5
troops in Belarus would be noticed by NATO (and ordinary people in Belarus, who would upload 100s of videos of the arriving russians).
In summary the main risk isn't that russia suddenly seizes and fortifies the Suwałki Gap... the main risk is that russia starts building up
3/5
The North Atlantic - one of the key battles in a russia-Europe war.
If Europe is defeated here, which with Europe's current forces and capabilities, is almost certain to happen... then russia can nuke the UK without fear of retaliation.
This will be a unsettling thread:
1/40
This battle will be very different from the battles in the Black Sea and Baltic Sea, which I discussed in an early thread, which is linked below.
To understand the North Atlantic Battle we need to look at Imperial Germany's WWI submarine campaign,
2 days ago I did a thread about the reasons russia can't defeat Ukraine and yet is still a deadly threat to Europe and NATO (link to the thread the next tweet).
Today I will talk about three of the fronts of a russia-Europe war: 1) Black Sea 2) Baltic Sea 3) North Atlantic
1/36
These three fronts will be air and sea battles, while Finland and the Baltics will be air and land battles; about which I will talk in another thread in the coming days.
I do not believe the US under control of Trump or Vance would come to the aid 2/n
• russia has no chance to defeat Ukraine
• russia is a deadly threat to NATO and the EU
Both of these are true... because as of 2025 Ukraine fields a far more capable military than NATO's 30 European members combined (!).
Let me explain.
1/39
As of August 2025 russia fields more than 1,3 million troops; at least half of which are fighting in or against Ukraine.
Ukraine has an estimated 1 million troops... maybe even 1,1 million troops. NATO's European members have double that: some 2.2 million troops, but 2/n
(there is always a "but" with European militaries):
• with more than double the personnel European NATO members manage to field only 20% more combat brigades than Ukraine. Partly because Western navies and air forces are bigger, but mostly because in all European militaries 3/n
People forget that for most if its history Europe was much, much more militarized than even during the Cold War.
Italy, from the end of the Third War of Independence in 1866 to 1939 fielded always 360-400 battalions, which fell to 110-115 during the Cold War, as the US
1/14
backed its European allies with the its massive air force. Today Italy fields 41 battalions (infantry, tanks, recon, special forces, rangers).
Likewise the British Army fielded for most of its history (especially after the 1908 Haldane reforms) 450-480 battalions, which came 2/n
in three types: 150-160 regular battalions (of which a third was always in India), around 100 reserve battalions to provide replacements for the regular battalions, and 200-220 territorial battalions, which (at least on paper) could not be deployed overseas. The British Army
3/n
And this is how Berlin would look like 3 days after putin attacks Europe... because Germany doesn't have the air defence ammo to defend any of its city for more than 2 days.
1/12
This is Copenhagen.
And this is how Copenhagen would look like the morning after putin attacks Europe... because Denmark doesn't have any air defence to defend itself.
2/12
This is Paris.
And this is how Paris would look like a day after putin attacks Europe... because France only has SAMP/T air defence systems, which is as of now has very limited capabilities against ballistic missiles.
3/12