There is something peculiar about the photojournalism of the Ukraine war. I've seen pictures of missiles arcing through the sky. I've seen pictures of blasted out buildings. I've seen pictures of refugees piling into trains. I've seen pictures of Russian soldiers walking through the empty streets of Kherson. I've seen satellite pictures of Russian convoys. I've seen maps showing the progress of Russian troops. I've seen videos of Volodymyr Zelensky pleading for more Western help.
But I haven't seen a single picture of actual battle. Not one.
Have I just missed this somehow? Or are there really no photographers at all in the vicinity of Ukranian troops as they fight the Russian invasion force? Not even around the cities? No embeds? No nothing?
What's going on?
There are numerous puzzling features of this conflict, for example the Russian convoy that has supposedly been unable to travel about 400 miles in a week. That's why I've taken no notice of any of the reports coming out of the country unless there is primary evidence to support it.
And the pundits furiously writing predictions about how a war that's been going a week will change Europe and the world for generations are making even bigger fools of themselves than usual.
Convoys can be seen an monitored from the air or by satellite. What Kevin is talking about is combat footage, like what we saw during the Vietnam war.
Yeah, but that convoy has been a strange story for the past 3-4 days. It sure looks like it is a sitting duck for an attack. There doesn’t seem like there is much ability to scatter during an attack. Has it been attacked? Have the Russians gained such air supremacy that they are unconcerned and can move as they please? Do the Ukrainians have any ability to attack it? On the news, all that I’ve heard is that it’s ominously there.
It's there, and it's real, and they really can't make it move. It's lower Manhattan gridlock raised to a major power, supplemented by empty fuel tanks that can't be reached by tankers because of the gridlock and some crew desertions and tire failures. They can't get off the road and into the fields because of the mud. Here's an article on Russian logistics that explains a lot of the background: https://warontherocks.com/2021/11/feeding-the-bear-a-closer-look-at-russian-army-logistics/
Why not attack a sitting duck? As long as the stuff is tied up in gridlock it's off the battlefield, isn't it? The Russians are preventing deployment for you. And maybe you have more immediate targets closer to the action that you want to hit with the weapons you have, and maybe up nearer the Belarus border there's better air cover so you don't want to risk losing too many of your assets going after this column that's stalled anyway.
Today I saw that Turkey is shipping a new batch of drones to Ukraine. These things have been really deadly. If I were the Ukrainians, I'd think maybe the smart thing to do would be to concentrate in other places until, or if, this column showed signs of moving. Then I'd start pasting it and risk some drone and plane losses. Maybe not so much until then.
This is spot on. The head of the column has been attacked; both lanes are blocked by blasted vehicles for a few hundred meters. The rest is immobilized. That part of Ukraine doesn't have a whole lot of quality roads. There wasn't much trade between Ukraine and Belarus because the Belarusians can't pay for anything.
Very smart. This is more or less what I've been thinking about, but you explain it much better than I could.
Thanks!
It appears from the aerial shots I've seen that they are huddled on pavement. I've also seen pictures of crippled heavy trucks and missile launchers where the axles appear to have broken and the tires are ripped apart by getting bogged down in mud (this is the season for it).
One guy on Kos who claimed a lot of experience in maintenance of heavy military equipment said it requires regular exercise, checking the tire pressurization systems, moving the vehicle so the sun isn't constantly shining on the same spots on the tires. Even with that you have to keep careful track of service life of of tires, condition of them, and plan regular replacement of tires. His opinion was that the Russians had been doing VERY LITTLE required maintenance.
There's a long military tradition of stiffing the troops. Of pay, of rations, of weapons and ammo, etc. Making up paper soldiers to siphon off even more pay. That shows up in a number of Shakespeare's histories - nobles accusing each other of diverting funds intended to raise and supply armies for the king. Iago's motivation for destroying Othello was being denied a quartermaster type position that he could grift into a very comfortable retirement.
I think the Russians are in deep shit/mud from a supply perspective. They might still win with overwhelming brutality, but it will be at a huge price to both Ukraine AND Russia. And with lots of anti-armor and anti-air weaponry flowing into Ukraine from the west, nothing is a sure bet.
Saw the same kind of comment about tires and maintenance, and it seemed convincing to me. Some cheapo Chinese and Belarusian tires, for example, that self-destruct in mud.
Video up today is of trainloads of replacement APC-type vehicles from somewhere in the east, a couple of weeks' transit time away. They're losing a lot of these things, even if you think the Ukrainian government's figures might be inflated.
Yes very odd.
Is it that odd? Who would be taking the pictures? People doing the fighting would be too busy, everyone else would be hiding.
I've seen pictures from a distance, where there is clearly fighting going on but it's hidden behind some obstruction, or just around the corner.
My sense is this is a general trend in warfare going back to the 90s. I'm old enough to recall the Gulf War (and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq in the following decade): I remembered at the time thinking that there was far less footage of actual battles than we got during the Vietnam War. Even in World War 2 there seemed (on the Allied side at least) a lot of real-time reportage via radio, compared to what we get now.
Not sure if this has been looked at in quantitative terms or not.
Drones can't do the job? Even cheap journalist-available civilian drones?
Ukraine can't provide footage (to collaborate the endless stories we hear of how great they are doing)?
The issue is not fighting per se, it is battles. Is there some weird aspect to modern doctrine that says you don't fight battles anymore, only small (less than a hundred total) isolated shootouts?
A cynic might even say that it's a lot more difficult for Mysterio to create convincing battle footage than convincing stills or convincing random explosions.
I would be astonished if any journalists are flying their own drones around.
And, yes, modern doctrine really is constant small skirmishes rather than large set battles.
For the Ukrainians it's a war of attrition, picking them off small bits at a time rather than blowing everything they have at once.
This is not a battle? Sure looks like one.
https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/ed3e13c296c0d319d5e9e1127b23d9653b67c493/164_155_1503_902/master/1503.jpg?width=465&quality=45&auto=format&fit=max&dpr=2&s=dea80a7b03d04383df15750b2a648159
At a guess, no one was there before it started and no one is able to get there now.
For one, I doubt the short-handed Ukrainian forces are willing to have embedded journalists. Second, for all the freedoms we presume are already present in Ukraine, the fact of the matter is, they're still ranked 96th-ish on press freedom, so not so free like other places. Third, they're under martial law which gives national and local forces have greater control of the press.
Naturally, one needs to view official releases with a critical eye. You can always read the US SDO transcripts (most days) talking about what they're seeing and hearing, if you don't believe what Ukraine is saying.
Where's Shane Bauer when you need him...
Seriously though Kevin - do you think the Ukrainians would be expending precious effort to embed and protect photojournalists with their already-stretched-thin forces? That person would be a liability. And any photojournalist close enough to "the action" to get pictures of say Russian atrocities would still have the very real problem of getting clear to tell the tale, and have the ability to transmit the image(s) and story. And I suspect the Starlink terminals recently sent to Ukraine are tasked to rather more urgent communication needs.
This is a good point. Remember all the "embedded" reporters with U.S. forces in both the Gulf War and the later Iraq invasion? They were embedded with OUR military, presumably in order to impress the public with the awesomeness of our war machine. It was part of the plan to keep public support through the roof. Generally speaking, it's not the victims of an invasion that offer this tasty treat to the media. These people are desperately trying to survive. They haven't got the resources to screw around babysitting camera crews so we can all getting thrilling video.
There will eventually be pix and video from daring reporters who just sneak themselves into the midst of the battle. Then we will start to see men, women, and children with arms and legs blown off. That's what the world needs in order to fully process the horror of this travesty, even if it has to be prefaced with "we have to warn you that some may find these images disturbing." At least I hope they get shown so shallow, cynical Americans get to see what happens in war.
Already seen the body parts from the artillery bombardments. They're there.
Again that does answer not the question being raised...
It’s like the moon landing. Fake news. Well, you know, my one republican acquaintance just texted me for the first time since it started.
“I didn’t like Trump but there’s no way Putin would have done this with Trump in office.”
So there you go. Shame on us for voting for Biden.
Shame on your R friend for being an idiot
Amen.
Considering the vast sums of money and "tactical support" the Russian/Oligarchs have given Republicans since 2008, I would be smarter with words. That includes Russian owned progtards.
In some sense, he is probably correct. Trump was doing Putin's work for him, undermining NATO, denying military aid to Ukraine, sharing intel with Russia. Why mess with that?
Exactly!
That's right in one sense: Putin would not have done it in 2020 because it might have jeopardized trump's reelection campaign. Once it was over, either Biden would be president or trump would have been a lame duck, so that's when the wheels were set in motion. I have no doubt that Putin would have invaded regardless of who is president now.
I suppose he's right: with Trump in office, Putin wouldn't have needed to go to war. He just would have taken Ukraine because Trump would have stepped back and obligingly let him. His big plan for a second term was to dismantle NATO.
Given the state of Russia's army after years of "reform," it's not at all clear that Russia was capable of an invasion during the Trump years.
Plus, why spend money on an invasion when Trump is destabilizing NATO for free?
There’s no way Putin would have done this with Trump in office?? There’s no way Putin would have needed to with Trump in office. Whether Putin really does have some kind of pee-pee video (SOP for an old KGB guy) or Trump was just a little intimidated and a lot in love with Vlad, Donald has long been Vlad’s obsequious lap dog.
Kevin isn't looking....there's tons of good stuff out there. I've been posting it here and it disappears....I will try again.
Dramatic Air Assualt probably Turkish TB2
https://twitter.com/mommentonews/status/1497917701733371908
Two Russian truck drivers killed by partisans.
https://twitter.com/antiputler_news/status/1497488114369114118
Traveller
Still disappearing.
Neither of which are BATTLEs...
I knew when Putin was putting up Stalin statues(in this regard, for wwii, or so the excuse) it was a bad sign a few years ago. Unlike Bakurin or Lenin, who saw the Soviet as Russian enlightenment on self-identified "cousins" like the Ukraine or Balkans. Putin's lackeys see themselves as Russians behind Stalin, masters, who should decide if you live or die. So most men in the Ukraine will die. The women raped and will breed to rebuild generational production in a animal farm. This already heavily "Russianized" Ukraine in the Soviet pertiod. Now, it will complete it.
That said, this was pretty typical of the indo European tribes back to PIE. It's why there were 17 women for every man 5000 years ago.
Two more (as a former combat soldier, I have intense interest...when I should be doing real work, I suppose...my bad)
https://twitter.com/AaronLeeHudson/status/1499462139987349506
https://twitter.com/revengeworld_/status/1499489987267424270
Best Wishes, Traveller
Good heavens, Kevin, talk about impatience!
But see twitter feed @RALee85 and others linked there. Tons of short scenes are published and circulating; they're largely undocumented but people are able to geolocate and derive times on them. Lee in particular is very good about how reliable any scene may be.
They're largely short snips because they're taken by participants' phone cameras in the field (so they tend to be after actual action), or from drone cameras, or by civilians in areas that are getting shelled and rocketed.
For reasons others point to, it's rare so far to find accredited journalists moving around with either side's military-- it only started a week ago, for cryin' out loud, and with almost zero prep time on the defensive side.
Plus, good luck getting to those Russian parachute squads assaulting airports or probing towns, or Russian artillerists blasting at Kharkiv from tens of miles away, or Russian convoys bogged down for days on end (bring your own rations and be prepared to share for that last one). And if I were running anything connected with Ukrainian military-- the only side that might conceivably bite on this-- I'd be worried about operational security first. They've been scrambling this whole time, after all.
Patience, grasshopper. The war will be violent enough for the news at 6 very soon.
Would any journalists have wanted to embed with troops who everyone assumed were about to get obliterated?
Yes, there does some some reluctance/incompetence on the part of Russian ground troops particularly on the road to Kyiv. And there does seem some elements of scare tactics in terms of attacks near nuclear power plants. BUT, from Crimea and by sea it seems the Russians are about to seal off all Ukraine's ports. This creates serious supply problems especially if NATO countries will not jump into the breach. Will we change this? Will we line up some mercenaries to do this? Is there some non-NATO regime who will help? This could get ugly very quickly.
Nope. Supplies are already going in different directions. The main routes have been down for awhile.
I believe those are longer, slower routes subject to attack. Ports are very important.
Yes, but ... Russian control of the coast would put them in a stronger position to try to extort a capitulation, but on the other hand don't they already control the Black Sea approaches? Blockade might be almost as effective as conquest from that point of view.
Either way, I can see this becoming a major problem if Russians continue this war over a longer term, especially for food and fuel. Right now, though, I think the anti-tank and anti-aircraft shipments are going in by air or road. Those methods can handle the volumes being shipped, and these are the needs of the moment.
The campaign to overrun the coast indicates to me that the goal isn't just capitulation, but complete submission. Submission, or extermination.
If only there was a way to just vaporize Putin this world would be so much better off.
Define “battle”. I have seen video /photos of Ukrainian civilians giving food water and a phone call home to Russian soldiers in the streets who supposedly quit the war.
I think very little of this war is fought face to face or infantry to infantry or in large units. This is because the Russian infantry is mostly green conscripts and the Ukranian Army is not that big or trained. Modern doctrine calls for dispersed forces, because the possibility of some sort of precision/artillery/rocket/tac nuke strike is too big.
It is being fought with artillery and rockets. It is fought with airstrikes and naval bombardment. It is fought with small units picking off things in the margins.
There are tanks, yes, but they are deployed to defend the artillery and the supplies, not as offense. The gasoline to run them costs too much both to buy and to transport to them.
Agree, it isn't "Sands of Iwo Jima" or Battle of the Bulge or even small-unit assaults on strongholds, or patrols in jungle or mountains or scrubland. Nothing is regularized enough to cover that way even if journalists could embed. And it's mechanized and artillerized and rocketized. So what we even could see pictured of combat is mostly incomings exploding and the aftermath of explosions, and explosions in progress as seen from drone cameras. Which is what we get. Beyond that I'm really not sure what kind of combat journalism Kevin's looking for here.
I don't think Kevin is "looking for anything" particular; certainly I am not. What we are trying to do is understand how/why the war is proceeding as it is.
Compare, for example the claim just before the Berlin Wall came down that war in Europe would have massed tank armies battling each other again, just like Kursk. We have not seen that. Neither have we seen dive-bombing ala Stuka's. Neither have we seen trenchs ala Iran-Iraq or Ethiopia-Eritrea.
This is not an issue of proving someone right or wrong; it's an attempt to understand what's happening, and what the implications are for future wars.
Does it mean that tanks are essentially pointless? Does it mean that the only war that matters is the war of ever smarter missiles? Was electronic warfare (not cyber warfare, but taking out radar and jamming communications) vastly more, or vastly less important than various people have predicted? etc etc.
It's hard to have these questioned answered when *every* item you see has to be verified...
What's on Twitter is basically useless garbage because the Twits, having learned precisely nothing from the past thirty years (either from the US government ala various wars, or from endless political fights) STILL assume the basic criteria for truth of anything they see are
- does it match want I want to believe? Must be true.
- does it disprove what I want to believe? Must be fake and poster must be a traitor.
Tell me you know nothing of war without having to tell me you know nothing of war.
Photo of Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert, from a happier, gentler time,
https://twitter.com/hammerit54/status/1499417123877101577
that golden age of yore.
Both secret jewess. Both will be gone soon.
That thing in your mirror is still there, you have to try harder.
Do not feed the troll.
Dude! I try to understand your point of view, but sometimes I wonder if I'm just wasting my time.
Yes, you are. Every response means another troll gets his bridge.
Yikes, I just ran across this this evening...generally I keep the gruesome stuff to myself, this is....actually borderline bad, not terrible, but getting there, Russian troops wiped out in the approaches to Kyiv.
https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1499649405779124224?s=21
Traveller
I should think it's much more difficult to photograph battles when you're side is not the aggressor. In Vietnam and both Iraq wars that's what we were.
I saw more than I wanted to - not actual combat, but enough dead bodies to make me wish I hadn't went searching.
New York Post says Zelensky survived three assassination attempts last week,
https://nypost.com/2022/03/03/ukraine-president-zelensky-survived-three-assassination-attempts/
and there are 400 Russian mercenaries still lurking about Kyiv, which sounds like a lot.
Russia's second biggest oil company calls for an end to Putin's war,
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/04/business/lukoil-end-war/index.html
This guy is also chairman of Alfa Bank, so may be can tell us about Bluto Barksalot's
private ATMpersonal bank server.Photographers can't really embed with anybody, so the situation is probably pretty unsafe, and pretty random. It also seems like the fighting is wide spread and diffuse, so hard know where to be.
Magnum: https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/conflict/ukraine-updates-from-magnum-photographers-in-the-field/
Getty: https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/ukraine-topix?assettype=image&editorialproducts=news&agreements=&collections=new&family=editorial&phrase=Ukraine%20TOPIX&recency=last30days&sort=newest
Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/news/pictures
Pictures of the Russian military action in Ukraine have been relegated to the same place the pictures of the flag draped coffins containing dead US troops from Iraq were hidden.
I wouldn't think your butt could hold more than one coffin.
Democratic liberals have no limits on their capacity to kill opponents to the project for a new American century.
Imaginary thoughts that can only impress the feeble do only impress the feeble.
American aggression is once again ascendant after less than twenty years since the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Democratic liberals support aggression against Russia and China more vehemently than do American neoconservatives. Their subjectivity to capitalist authoritarianism overrides any logic about peace and the history of their national aggression.
And that is a feeble minded and imaginary idea.
All this talk about "journalists" and "camera crews" and WWII and Vietnam is so 20th century. All a person needs to do in Modern Times is hold up their phone, then tweet out the resulting video. Then the "journalists" pick it up.
If this ISN'T happening, it's an anomaly.
Ah! I see innumerable folks had already published links to combat videos ... on Twitter. I was late, but otherwise reasonably right. (read first, THEN write, so you can write right!)
Also, it's only been nine days, it takes a while to work up the nerve.
I saw a video on YouTube of Ukrainian "nationalists" throwing hundreds of molotovs over rubble barriers at Russian tanks. It was unbelievable. I'd never imagined you could burn a tank to destroy it, but I can't imagine someone surviving inside of that conflagration. It was removed for violating YouTube's tos.
They have diagrams showing the vulnerable spots on all these vehicles. No idea whether they're actually able to aim the bottles, but they're making so many they might not need to. They're blending the gas with styrofoam too, which is supposed to make it sticky like napalm. Can do huge damage, especially if a tank is stopped or just crawling along. Tanks and other armor have many intakes and ports that can be vulnerable.
I had always thought being on a submarine was the last thing I'd ever want to do in the military, until I saw the movie Fury.
No, being in a tank is absolutely the worst.
I am sure there will be more with time. CNN it's been verifying video from social media, but they are very timid about showing any disturbing footage on TV.
The NY Times has just posted some verified video from Mariapol: https://twitter.com/cliffordlevy/status/1499855908326752260?t=51OIwjdmHntEg06CXAyQIw&s=19
There's an article up on Daily Kos on the Russian supply problem.
It confirms what I was reading about all the past week and I got the names. The hard-ass who was keeping the oligarchs working in defense supply industries was Minister Serdyukov. He annoyed the oligarchs because while he was willing to be overcharged he insisted on getting good quality AND the agreed on quantity. He got canned in 2012. His replacement was a guy named Shoygu, who had been working in government since 1991 and was a "let the grift times roll".
Check the article in Kos and follow the links to the twitter thread and the Breaking Defense site. The cupboard is bare, lots of equipment is missing at all sorts of levels, and with the sanctions now in place, Russian defense officials have no idea when they can replenish.
From Kos: