Bakhmut was a killing field for Russian soldiers but it's a meaningless blown up piece of land at this point. Ukraine going on the offensive there would just make it a killing field for their own soldiers - the advantage there is being on the defense. It was stupid for Russia to focus on it then and it would be stupid for Ukraine to focus on it now.
Are you in the Kremlin? Are you next to putin? We have no idea what Putin wants or thinks. We're going by secondary sources and what we think. Why would it be killing field for their soliders if it's the only place where RU hadn't prepared defensive lines nor have been able to mine the city?
IIRC Ukraine is concentrating their efforts in capturing the hills that overlook Bakhmut, where they can fire at will on the Russian soldiers that are tasked with defending it.
https://www.politico.com/newsletter...p-freedom-caucus-ally-gets-cold-feet-00111608 Ukraine’s top Freedom Caucus ally gets cold feet Standing in front of a PowerPoint presentation on the national debt, Rep. Andy Harris told his constituents it’s about time to wind down direct U.S. aid to Ukraine. “Is this more a stalemate? Should we be realistic about it? I think we probably should,” Harris (R-Md.) said at a Tuesday night town hall, held at a public library about 75 miles north of Washington. He said of Ukraine’s springtime offensive that was intended to turn the tide of the war: “I’ll be blunt, it’s failed.” And he was blunt, too, about the prospects for a victory ahead: “I’m not sure it’s winnable anymore.”
And are you next to Putin? Putin could end the war right away. He could come out and say that they are halting all actions in Ukraine including launching drone strikes and agree to a withdrawl of his forces. He shows no intention of doing that. Conversely Ukraine could agree to a cessation of hostilities but they show no intention of doing that either. From what I can see it is as others have said that the South is far more stragically significant regarding cutting off Crimea. Bakhmut was significant symbolically and from what I recall even US military was advising Ukraine not to spend so much time or resources on Bakhmut.
Mines obviously are a signifcant problem. However, artillery is the bigger problem and the Russians have been fighting in the Bakhmut area for months and months. They have every inch of that place dialed in with artillery. They would love a full out assault where they can wipe out dozens of Ukrainian vehicles and hundreds of infantry. Whenever the Ukrainians attack in mass with a bunch of Bradley's or other vehicles they get smashed by artillery sacrificing a bunch of men and equipment for minimal gains. Ukraine has quite a bit of anti-mining equipment. It's kind of hard to use when you are under artillery fire. "Hryshchenko described how his 127th Brigade rations ammunition for its howitzer, while each day the Russians are covering every square mile with shells until every building is destroyed" “If I had that opportunity to use that much artillery,” he said, “I would probably finish the war.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/05/12/bakhmut-ukraine-russia-prigozhin/
It's a serious problem, not only providing enough artillery shells for Ukraine's howitzers, and we and our allies are methodically replacing their old Soviet era 152mm guns with our modern 155mm longer range cannons, but also replacing the barrels, which are being quickly worn out from the high rate at which they are being used. I assume that Ukraine is getting not just howitzers and shells from the former eastern bloc countries, but replacement barrels as well for their former USSR guns. I also assume that Ukraine is producing all those things, and so much more, as best they can, but a great deal of their heavy industry is in occupied Eastern Ukraine. One thing we are doing to help, and helping ourselves modernize at the same time, is ramping up production of heavy artillery shells, the 155mm shells, which we'll be producing at the rate of 85,000 a month (that's a million a year!) by the beginning of fiscal year 2025. We're also expanding and modernizing the Army's Watervliet Arsenal, where we build the majority of our artillery and tank barrels, as well as related long range mortars, etc. Much of that was being built using very old massive lathes and other machinery, some of it dating back to the 1940's. Heck, some of the buildings date back to the 1800's. Old, yes, but they'll hold modern, computerized machinery as well as the old stuff that's being replaced.
We need a few f16s shot down to justify another half a trillion dollar contract for the next Gen fighter.... since the f22 and f35 are largely over price turds.
Only a moron would think the f22 is an overpriced turd. You always find new ways to embarrass yourself time after time. Truly remarkable
Don’t worry Buck - he has some healing crystals and moon rocks he wants to sell you with Alex Jones out the back of his taco truck.
I mean, he has openly said it, if that helps any... For the same reasons it was a killing field for Russian soldiers despite Ukraine not mining their own city. Homefield advantage, basically - defending territory is always easier than capturing it.
I'm not the one whos debating what's actually happening in real life. Folks are claiming Putin doesn't want peace but his ministers are all talking peace nd meeting diplomats and his military generals are all pushing for a ceasefire. This is the facts on the ground but others are stating its all a bluff and Putin doesn't want peace. I'm just going by whats happening on the ground. Putin can say what he wants but that's just basic negotiating tactics. I don't believe that putin doesn't want peace
