How would one go about taking the Ukranian army across the trench of perikope?

How would one go about taking the Ukranian army across the trench of perikope? If they want to retake Crimea they either invade with thousands of RHIBs and helicopters in some weird coast to coast marine action, or they push the isthmus.

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

    Destroy bridge + Sink resupply vessels. Basically same plan as Kherson.

    Ranged fires will push back the Russians from the isthmus or force them into an attritional battle they can't hope to win without resupply. Shoot until the Russians can no longer shoot back. Only this time, there will be no way to retreat easily.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >If they want to retake Crimea they either invade with thousands of RHIBs and helicopters in some weird coast to coast marine action, or they push the isthmus.
      Alternatively, it could be a matter of gaining such an advantage in other theaters that ownership of Crimea becomes a plausible demand in a peace treaty. Or

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      basically this. slow and attritional or starving them out. Force russia to choose between falling back or waste resources resupplying by sea and air. They will refuse to make that choice and tell their soldiers to harvest their own grain and smelt armor in the a local shop.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This. Crimea has never been defended successfully when cut of from the main land.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        basically this. slow and attritional or starving them out. Force russia to choose between falling back or waste resources resupplying by sea and air. They will refuse to make that choice and tell their soldiers to harvest their own grain and smelt armor in the a local shop.

        Dont need to. The rotten sea can literally just be marched through with your soldiers still capable of shouldering their rifle. A modern ifv can literaly just roll through it.

        Seriously lads, the sea averages at a meter deep

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >the sea averages at a meter deep
          Of waterlogged, soft sand. That's not trivial, even for vehicles capable of making the crossing. For many, it's impossible, necessitating any logistics either be packed into IFVs as well or that the salient can quickly blitz a flank towards the MSR. Quickly is the operative word here.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >those results
    b-but i thought /k/ was a pro ukrainian board...

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I voted pro russian pro lgbt. Polls are meant for shitposting.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    so i assume perikope is a play on words, what is it actually called?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Perekop

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    You seem to "know" an awful lot about what Ukraine "needs" to do. Have you considered offering your services to their high command? I'll bet they have nothing better to do than listen to your wisdom.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Geography is pretty deterministic here. You come in by the M17 over the Perekop isthmus, or by an even narrower glorified sand bar carrying the M18. The Ukranian high command don't need the geography of their own nation explained to them, even if it's too complex for you.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        You could also go down the Arabat Spit if you feel lucky.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Or you drive across the syash which is only 1-2 ft deep

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Unironically drive down the canal after keeping it flooded for a day or two previously to frick around with mines.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why do /misc/tards talk about wiener so much?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      All vatniks do

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Crimea has all negatives of an island with no benefits. side who controls connection with mainland will always win against side that only controls Crimea, which is exactly what happened each and every time army came to capture the peninsula

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Crimea needs to import water as there are only very few non salt water sources on it.
    It used to get it's water from a channel running down from Kherson, which is now cut off.
    So now it gets it from the rail/road connection with the russian mainland. If/when the ukies reach the trench that vital logistical link will be in range of various long range platforms the ukies have in inventory.
    And so they can degrade the russian ability not just to supply their army in the crimea but even provided the basics for the people living there.
    2.5mil people live there, just getting them the 5 liters they need for drinking and some cooking nothing else means you need to mover some 12.5 liters of water each and every day. good luck doing that without a channel or pipeline

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >you need to mover some 12.5 liters of water each and every day
      My god...12.5 liters a day...

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Water is heavy, yo

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        12.5million
        happy now annon is doing 5 x 2.5milion yourself to hard

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine just needs to destroy the bridge, hit resupplying attempts and wait as the mass civvie panic makes holding untenable IMO

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's not quite that simple. Remember, for all valid arguments against Russia's invasion of Ukraine and earlier annexation of Crimea, the region did in fact vote to secede from Ukraine. The most militarily expedient option comes at a huge cost in goodwill among the people whose territory Ukraine ostensibly wants to regain. While things like "civilian deaths" may seem inconsequential to jaded internet edgelords, to the people in charge, it's significantly more important. It's one thing to shitpost about causing potentially hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths (water rations would, of course, be prioritized to the military over civilians), it's another thing to be in the room of people who will directly decide that outcome.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the region did in fact vote to secede from Ukraine.
        It was a literal vote at gunpoint. That said there WERE more pro-Russian people there than other areas. But now that has changed drastically. The corruption and dysfunction that Russian governance brought slowly eroded any goodwill and the war has smashed it quite badly over the last year.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Either way, I doubt a complete siege of Crimea is likely to generate much positivity among the civilians living there.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Who cares, 60% of them will flee to Russia and have their former homes filled with ukranian returnees.crimea will be feverently anti russian when this war is done

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        No the "regions" were separated to look good for that propaganda.
        Nearly all the population is in Sevastopol, which voted to stay Ukrainian, but because some small number of commie hicks just hit the 50% line for succession were meant to just lie and pretend the entire population of Crimea was more than 50% in support.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Not to mention they let literal Russian tourists vote

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I personally take a more skeptical viewpoint. However much I'd like to believe it was completely a Russian rigged vote, I want to keep my mind open. We'll probably never know exactly what happened to a high degree of objective certainty, but it will become clearer over the years. Either way, the idea that fewer in Crimea voted for Russian annexation than commonly recognized does not invalidate the (actual) point I was making... that you do not want to cause excessive civilian deaths by enacting a complete siege on the peninsula. If anything, the presence of sympathetic Ukrainians should make this approach MORE distasteful rather than less.

          It's important either way.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ukraine would probably trade Crimea permanently in exchange for Russia leaving the rest of Ukraine. Unfortunately Putin is determined to play winner-takes-all stakes of moronation, which only increases the chances he loses everything.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Ukraine would probably trade Crimea permanently in exchange for Russia leaving the rest of Ukraine.
          Remember the first Chechen war, where the Chechens repelled Russia and sued for peace. Then, remember the second Chechen war, and remember which country it is over which Russia claims sovereignty. Frankly, Russia is not to be trusted. Peace would very likely be short-lived if at all achieved. A peace treaty with Ukraine would eventually cause political dissonance in Russia, and if Vlad survives it, the political calculus will probably necessitate yet another invasion. With refreshed army corps and lessons learned, it's more likely that the next one would be successful. Russia realistically needs to die. Its current system of governance is untenable for the stability of Eurasia. Without significant changes coming from within Russia, any peace is meaningless. Ukraine knows this.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >it's more likely that the next one would be successful
            Ukraine is gonna be flooded with western equipment after this war, if not part of NATO if they actually pull off a complete victory.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >trusting the russian "vote"
        You must be joking

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the region did in fact vote to secede from Ukraine
        Under occupation (and keeping in mind a frickton of people boycotted that nonsense cause they knew it was rigged).

        After they had already voted to join Ukraine.

        And Ukraine has no reason to fricking respect that vote. Any Crimeans that wanted to live in Russia were free to frick off to Russia.

        Independence votes are one thing, but voting to join an existing nation that would have you is just fricking treason.

        By the way
        >Doing nothing wasn't a choice on that vote.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I honestly dont understand why the russians havent just dug a giant canal and turned crimea into an island yet

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Black army

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