Did Russia fuck up completely in Mariupol?

Aside from their gross lack of discipline and morality + shit doctrine, they flattened the entire city in vicious fightings and melees for months. Just imagine what happened in Bakhmut in over 10 months but only happening 3 months instead. This was during the beginning of the invasion, and Azov was the only thing standing in the way of Russian advancements tpwards the South and into Moldova in a 'land bridge'to then move north to capture the rest of their country. They fricked up both plans A and B. They flunked A because their special forces were holed up there with little supplies in the freezing ass cold while both sides FUBAR'd each other. Due to a shortage in Russian SOF who could've had devastating effect elsewhere, they instead wasted almost all of their modern equipmemt and tactical battalion groups.

So my question is, during the upcoming 2nd counteroffensive by Ukraine when they take Melitopol/Mariupol, would what Russia did to that city make it much easier for Ukraine to regain control over it, simply given the fact that urban warfare is a nightmare? How do you think it would go in the sequel to it? It's already bad enough they fell for the distraction so that the rest of the country could get supplies, training and preparations just for some bizarre symbolic reasoning behind it (even though their victory came a little too late).

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Most of the troops lost in the actions at Mariupol were donbabweans though. Regular puccian losses were only a fraction of the total, but still several thousand.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      How do you know this? The last I checked, there were over 7500 Russian casualties over there (including 2,500 fatalities). In comparison, about 315 Azov were killed.

      They kicked the frick out of both the Chechens and other special forces unit while massively outnumbered and cut off from resupply the whole time. They weren't even fricking prepared for it either. The initial invasion was so intense that entire defensive columns around the perimeter of the city evaporated within days as Ukraine fought them all off with nothing but namely APCs and light machine guns.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >The last I checked, there were over 7500 Russian casualties over there (including 2,500 fatalities). In comparison, about 315 Azov were killed.
        Come on, not even their own propaganda numbers are this low

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >How do you know this? The last I checked, there were over 7500 Russian casualties over there (including 2,500 fatalities). In comparison, about 315 Azov were killed.
        You're moronic if you believe these numbers

        Russia is shit, but there's a point where you're just coping with wishful thinking

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >7500 Russian casualties over there (including 2,500 fatalities). In comparison, about 315 Azov were killed.
        Ukranian estimates for Mariupol were 20 times lower than even UN estimates, let alone Russian ones for other factors. It's clear that they've been grossly over and under estimating all numbers to look like they could win this, so the west sends more gibbs.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >They kicked the frick out of both the Chechens and other special forces unit
        Yeah. They kicked ass so hard they lost. Right. You mutts invent whole new tier of cope

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Ukraine lost Mariupol
          In what way? They stopped a Russian advance towards the South. Are you saying they won simply for taking the city? If that was Russia's goal all along is to simply take the city, then they succeeded, I guess. But what was Ukraine's goals for Mariupol? That's the question you should be asking yourself. There is such a thing as a strategic victory. And even if their goal was to unblock the city, even then you're still wrong about it, because one person was able to do just that shortly before the surrender.

          If your idea of a "victory" is simply taking land, then you're a fricking moron who doesn't understand how war works and should probably frick off from this board.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            taking land gives war score

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              How many victory points is Bakhmut worth?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                its a oblast capital, so probably a lot

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's not though.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                prove it

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >in what way
            They lost the city and azov got neutered. There are prisoners from this battle that are being swapped to this very day.
            You can argue that it was to buy time or the trading ratio made it favorable for Ukraine but the truth is that this was largely a dpr/lpr affair meaning that the actual # of Russians tied down here were not as many as people make it out to seem meaning that if they had just surrendered in weeks rather than months its unlikely that any major city would have fallen in its place. So the "buying time" hypothesis is wrong.
            Its true that the casualty trading ratio was vastly in favor of Ukraine but with around 4000 guys being captured it balanced out to the point where it went from probably 6:1 to 1.5:1. Still good but you can only do so much. Before someone calls bs on that Ukraine said 6000 kia Russians and Russia is confirmed to have taken the surrender of 4000 from Azovstal so I think 1000 Ukrainian kia is a fair estimate
            So with that being flawed, what did Ukraine win here? Well, they got their own Alamo and killed off guys that they (Zelensky) had already kind of wanted to get rid of anyway. Does this amount to winning the battle in the long run? I dont think so.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >but the truth is that this was largely a dpr/lpr affair meaning that the actual

              This is a weird cope to me.
              Russia sacrificed veterans of the Donbass war who fought from 2014 to save life of the useless barely legal kontraktnik motostrelki - doesnt sound like a great deal to me.

              Currently separatist units don't exist anymore de facto - they had to replenish them with russians from russia because male population of russian occupied donbass is virtually 404

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah its a bad loss for Russia I agree. My point was that people point to the battle buying time for places like Mykolaiv but in reality it didn't tie down enough actual Russians for it to be a deciding factor in the fall of any given city. Its not a flawless victory for Russia but its not exactly a win or something that was necessary for Ukraine in any way

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This is only a good thing if you’re a short-sighted chimp person tho. Those needed to the hero’s of the whole thing. Freedom fighters fighter for their land and freedom or whatever. Instead they were basically just like if you pencil in a pencil sharpener backwards, they were the eraser and bit of flimsy metal that just got chewed to shit real quick.

      Honestly idk how much Russians really even comprehend the concept of foresight or “not making insanely catastrophically bad decisions in the long term to pretend to win short term victories” or whatever.

      Like has there ever been a more brain drained society in history?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Am drunk disregard. Russia’s actions defy decades of US planning because nobody planned on them being so fricking stupid and self-destructive

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          better to be overprepared than not. also remember that in pretty much all the nato wargames the us and europeans were either losing or got crippled badly, russia was seen as a more than capable fighting force, american MIC was pumping out ever modern shit for decades and yet the US struggles with providing ukraine with shitty arty shells and armored vehicles. they can't risk giving away too much shit as in not to get caught lacking in a standoff against chyna in the near future.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I don't think there ever will be anything quite like Russia on earth for the rest of human history.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Largest Azov battalion.
      >muh russian ethnicity losses dont count
      The whole Ukraine is unironically Russian. Guess all their losses dont matter. Especially at such poor ratio

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The funny thing is that Donbwabwan and Lugandese shock troops were actually better and more experienced than russian regulars.

      They wasted them in Mariupol, Popasna and Severodonetsk and since then had to relly on convict meatwaves and VDV remnants.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I don't think what Russia did to the city itself will make much difference for Ukraine's counter-offensive (other than pissing them off, of course). This is because it's highly unlikely Ukraine will try urban warfare in any city. If they reach Mariupol, Ukraine will just surround the city and make sure their guys are well-supplied, while using their precision artilley to cut Russian supply routes and take out key targets

    See also: Kherson

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yes, but Kherson was strategically irrelevant for Russia anyways. Also, how can there be urban warfare as bad as last time when there's hardly any standing buildings left? It would be like fighting in a swimming pool almost.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Kherson was pretty important - because they lack the city of Kherson, they have to dig and man hundreds of miles of trenches on the left bank of the dniper

        >how can there be urban warfare as bad as last time when there's hardly any standing buildings left?
        There's still plenty of rubble and ruined buildings. It's just a waste of manpower to waste it on urban combat. Ukraine has spent a lot of training and resources on being able to into logistics, so they don't have to waste their guys on this shit

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Kherson was strategically irrelevant for Russia anyways
        Everything Russia captures is relevant until they lose it. Such is life.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Also, how can there be urban warfare as bad as last time when there's hardly any standing buildings left?
        rubble is even worse for urban warfare since the defeding side can hide easier. when everything looks like heaps of bricks, trash and dust you never know where the fire is coming from, lot's of possibilities to hide and hit an advancign force before they even see you.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Can you homosexuals please frick off to a different board with the constant Russia/Ukraine spam?

    These moronic ass threads don't even make a pretext of being about a weapon.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      ok just remind me if you were posting the same nonsense when people talked about the Iraq or Afghan wars in here, for the whole class

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >largest land war in Europe in 78 fricking years
      >ie since WW2
      >homosexualS FRICK OFF THE WEAPONS BOARD REEEEEEEEEEEE

      Pre-2022 /k/ would be ashamed of people like you. This war is literally what most of us have been salivating about for more than a decade; a chance to see a full on conflict against Russia. No pussy shit like 2014 Crimea War when Ukraine was weak as shit. A chance to see Western equipment finally be truly used head to head against Russian equipment used by actual Russians instead of proxies.

      This war has literally provided some of the most kino combat footage to ever come out of a war, easily dunking Iraq/Afghanistan content, and you want to b***h about people talking about all aspects of the war. Frick you.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >these are the people that got us into iraq and afghanistan
        can't wait to see this turn into a quagmire that'll last 50 years as the west continues to plow money into it

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Gee I dunno anon, wasting money in the Middle East on goat frickers doesn't quite compare to removing Russia's ability to wage war or remain a world power for the next 30 years. All that for just our old Cold War stockpiles of 70s/80s/90s tech and not having to risk a single Western soldier, aircraft, carrier or naval asset. I'll gladly pay taxes towards killing Russian's

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >russia
            >super power
            stopped reading there. Lets not kid ourselves, russia is a shell of its former self, the only thing making them a super power is nuclear weapons

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I didn't say that they were a super power only that they are a world power. And yes, their nuclear weapons are the main reason for that, but the other reason WAS their vast stockpiles of Soviet-era weapons/vehicles/aircraft/ammo etc. Ukraine is draining those stockpiles to the point where with their economy and military production they will NEVER be able to replace a fraction of the shit they're spending in Ukraine, and when the country inevitably fractures into a civil war in the next 5 years, the world will likely swoop in to secure the nukes as we gave Russia a chance to normalize after the fall of the USSR and they won't get that same chance again.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >russia
              >power
              very funny

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          sounds fricking based, 50 guaranteed years of a neutered Russia sign me the frick up there's basically limitless return on every dollar spent this way

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >can't wait to see this turn into a quagmire that'll last 50 years as the west continues to plow money into it

          i guarantee russia itself will collapse before the 50 year mark with this level of intensity, if they cant win in the next couple of years, they better pull out

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Russia was already going to collapse in 30 years. Now it's down to like 15, probably. Maybe even faster.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          don't worry it won't

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          If we are going to be honest here Anon, with Putin at the helm, Russia is never going to go into total war mode because that hurts his poll ratings at home and after being driven loony by his two years of Covid isolation, plus the natural paranoia of a dictator, he's under the impression that the Russian army is making serious gains everyday and that he doesn't need to do any more but apart from sit back and relax.
          Such is what happens when your only source of information on the situation is Russian state news broadcasters, because Poot-Poot believes everything on the internet is a lie funded by The West, whoever The West may be. Because of this, I expect Russia to half-arse itself into oblivion in the next three years, tops, if things continue as they are.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          So you are saying there is still time to invest in Lockheed and other defense stocks?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I'm 90% certain Cheney and Rumsfeld aren't possessing anons to ghostwrite for them on /k/, no.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        it is just zigger and wumao bugs trying to find ways to shut down any talk about the war outside /misc/ where they can spam "positive" spin on it

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      They won't. Enjoy the NAFO troony mods handing you a ban for not sucking off a israelite country known most for money laundering in the west.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Yet they will forever stay in the west.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Where should it be discussed instead?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Can you homosexuals please frick off to a different board with the constant Russia/Ukraine spam?
      >These moronic ass threads don't even make a pretext of being about a weapon.

      nooooo let's have another boring revolver thread instead noooo

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >completely frick it up
    yes, just like most of the northern front at the time, Mariupol was obviously meant to be a day 3 objective. Maybe 2 weeks (i know, the meme) tops.

    Nah, the russians will just run away. Like they ran from most of the settlements during the Kharkiv counter offensive in september.

    Also, do you remember all the analysts, US govt officials, PrepHoleners, everyone - anticipating a giant, nightmarish urban battle that was going to make the Mariupol seige look like christmas? And what happened there?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Also, do you remember all the analysts, US govt officials, PrepHoleners, everyone - anticipating a giant, nightmarish urban battle that was going to make the Mariupol seige look like christmas? And what happened there?
      forgot to mention i was talking about Kherson ffs

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Azov was the only thing standing in the way of Russian advancements tpwards the South and into Moldova
    huh???

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Did Russia frick up completely in Mariupol?

    they didnt frick up at Mariupol, they fricked up the moment they crossed the border, Mariupol was simply one the most clear indicators at the begining of the war that things have gone horribly, horribly wrong

    i mean, the battle for Mariupol lasted as long as the infamous battle of Grozny, this was just one city, if the Ukis were willing to defend just one city so viciously, despite being outnumbered and surrounded, how costly would the rest of the war be for russia? more than one russian commander probably thought the same thing, but of course, you are not allowed to criticize tzar putin's brilliant plan

    but now as we all know, shit went so much worse for russia than any early estimate could predict, with successful Ukrainian counter offensives, more and more western equipment, and an increasingly insurmontable Ukrainian defense

    the Battle of Mariupol lasted as long as the Battle of Grozny
    the Battle of Soledar lasted as long as the Battle of Stalingrad
    and by the time it finally ends, the Battle of Bakhmut will probably have lasted as long as the Battle of Verdun

    each time russia finds itself fighting increasingly longer and more costly battles, for smaller and smaller cities and towns

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      from
      >kyiv in 3 days, all of ukraine in 2 weeks!
      to
      >after 7 months of fighting, we've entered the pile of rubble in the center of bakhmut so we LEGALLY own it now!

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        One thing was an attempt at coup d'etat. The latter was a war waged against a lesser country with backing of entire west.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They couldn't pull off the coup with their best forces rushing an unprepared Ukraine. They should have called it off 2 weeks in, but their own propaganda forced them to continue. They've invested so much they can't back down now but they aren't achieving anything and things just get worse. This is where 30 years of strongman propaganda has got them.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I'm looking forward to the this is what winning looks like except instead of heroin addicted afghanis, it's ukraine as a bombed out shit hole

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Most of the Ukraine is untouched by war, ironically only the russian speaking parts got to experience Russian World.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            From
            >'Yeah russia is neighbour.'
            to
            >'I SWEAR THIS BLOOD DEBT SHALL BE PAID IN FULL.'

            Putin will certainly go down in history.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >21 days to Baghdad
        >21 months to Bakhmut

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >okraina internet defense force
      >posts picture from troony cartoon
      Figures.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    ukies were extremely determined to keep the city and basically fought to a last stand in the azovstal plant.
    also there are stories of ukie helicopters still managing to sneak past russian defense lines to bring in supplies and evac the wounded at night so they weren't entirely abandoned.
    i doubt the russian conscripts will feel the same way when their time comes (let alone having russia commit their precious helicopters to rescue worthless mobiks), if/when the city is encircled they'll probably surrender en masse.
    if we get to the point where russians in mariupol have to make a last stand then the war is already over for russia.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    time is the most valuable resource in a war
    mariupol was a strategic neccesity to delay the russians just long enough for ukraine to stabalize the frontline
    it exceeded expectations it not enough achieved that but required so much manpower that all units involved were heavily damaged and caused further delays to russian operations

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    btw Google Maps is now showing what Mariupol currently looks like

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >bomb all civilian houses
      >bomb the theatre marked with "children"
      >kidnap the people, city almost devoid of cars
      >leave the shitty orthodox church intact
      I don't see Russia getting a pass for this war from even the other BRICS countries. Now people from the whole world have access to see the city on Google Maps, difficult to cover this with more russki propaganda

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's actually incredibly fricking sad reading some of the google reviews for some of the places like the theatre.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The contrast of the old pre-war reviews of the theatre, and the current state of it via satellite images, is quite amazing to witness.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          On the bottom of that pic, remembrance of previous Russian chimpouts in Ukraine: Monument to Victims of Holodomor and Political Repression
          At the same time, satellite images of Donetsk and Luhansk cities show completely normal infrastructure/buildings. No bombings detected, even after "8 years of Ukraine shelling"

          Russia delenda est. Only lies, incompetence and destruction coming from there

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          https://www.google.com/maps/@47.0959511,37.5477905,3a,75y,85.03h,101.78t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1sAF1QipNVC0FQFLcVX551hhYgjlKWoB5VUydQNdB5idz-!2e10!3e11!6shttps:%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipNVC0FQFLcVX551hhYgjlKWoB5VUydQNdB5idz-%3Dw203-h100-k-no-pi-2.1158571-ya259.8004-ro2.159517-fo100!7i5376!8i2688?authuser=0

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            When did they add sat imagery for Mariupol? I've been scanning google maps for the longest time and the only evidence of the war they've shown was the Kharkov border crossing for like 2 weeks before it got scrubbed and snake island

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Not currently, these seem to be from late march 2022.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I want to see every russian soldier put in the ground

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        why just the soldiers?

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >They fricked up both plans A and B. They flunked A because their special forces were holed up there with little supplies in the freezing ass cold while both sides FUBAR'd each other. Due to a shortage in Russian SOF who could've had devastating effect elsewhere, they instead wasted almost all of their modern equipmemt and tactical battalion groups.
    You're a moron, your analysis is moronic and you should fricking look through a noose.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why does azov get all the glory, ukie marinaders were there as well

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine wouldn't fight over Mariupol, they would go past it, just past the border into Russia to target the logistical hub that supplies for both Crimea and Donbas passes through, Rostov will be the next Mariupol. Difference is Ukraine will be attacking, Ukraine only need to severe rail, road, and shipping links not capture it, and Ukraine doesn't need to push past Rostov to prevent all Russian access to the Ukraines objectives of Crimea and donbas. So this is a realistic situation op proposes, but may as well clarify the target in which it would occur

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Did Russia frick up completely
    Not reading the rest, just saying yes and knowing that I'm almost definitely right.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *