Kherson offensive?

Ukraine Conflict Updates

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, November 18

Click here to read the full report.

Key Takeaways

• Russian officials are preparing for further covert mobilization efforts even as the fall conscription cycle is underway, likely further diminishing the development of quality mobilized and conscripted servicemen.
• The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) announced that it does not recognize the illegal Russian seizure of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) or the illegal annexation of other occupied Ukrainian territory, a sharp escalation in IAEA rhetoric.
• Social media footage circulated on November 18 shows a Russian soldier opening fire on Ukrainians as other Russian soldiers were surrendering.
• Russian forces reinforced rear areas in Luhansk Oblast and attempted to regain lost positions as Ukrainian troops continued counteroffensive operations along the Svatove-Kreminna line.
• Russian forces continued limited ground assaults near Bakhmut and Avdiivka and in western Donetsk Oblast.
• Russian occupation officials and military leadership are seemingly increasingly concerned about subsequent Ukrainian counteroffensive operations in southern Ukraine.
• Russia continues to face exceedingly low morale and poor discipline among its forces against the backdrop of ongoing domestic backlash to partial mobilization.
• Russian occupation officials and forces continued to intensify filtration measures in Russian-occupied territories in Ukraine and to undermine the Ukrainian national identity. . . .

Ukrainian forces continued to strike Russian military assets and concentration areas south of the Dnipro River. The Ukrainian General Staff reported on November 18 that Ukrainian strikes in previous days killed over 50 Russian military personnel in Skadovsk and destroyed an ammunition depot in Chaplynka.[31] Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command stated that Ukrainian strikes destroyed military assets along the eastern bank of the river, including in Nova Kakhovka, Hola Prystan, and Oleshky.[32] . . . .

Russian occupation officials continued efforts to undermine the Ukrainian national identity. The Luhansk Oblast Administration reported that occupation officials appointed a Russian citizen from Novosibirsk, Novosibirsk Oblast, as director of a secondary school in Novooleskandrivka, Luhansk Oblast, and that occupation officials forced Ukrainian civil servants to sign documents renouncing their Ukrainian citizenship.[58] The Ukrainian Resistance Center reported that occupation officials held school events to teach Ukrainian children how to detect pro-Ukrainian residents and how to notify Russian occupation officials about them.[59] The Center clarified that so far, Ukrainian children are not yet going to officials to inform on pro-Ukrainian activities and are only telling their parents.

Russian occupation officials continued to face difficulties dealing with wounded Russian forces in occupied Ukrainian territory on November 18. The Ukrainian Resistance Center reported that occupation officials brought in Russian doctors and medical interns to the occupied territories because Ukrainian residents refused to provide medical services to Russian soldiers and the number of wounded Russian forces is increasing.[60] Ukrainian Melitopol Mayor Ivan Fedorov amplified reports from recent days that Russian occupation officials are attempting to collect blood from Ukrainian residents for wounded Russian forces.[61] Fedorov reiterated that occupation officials are expelling Ukrainian residents from the Melitopol hospital inpatient unit to free up wards for wounded Russian forces.[62]

 

Deleted.

 

I suggest you should not parade your lack of knowledge. Have you heard of the Holy Alliance?

Latin America and the Monroe Doctrine
http://www.let.rug.nl › usa › outlines › history-1994 › l...

At just this point, Russia, Prussia and Austria formed an association called the Holy Alliance to protect themselves against revolution.

". . . The Monroe Doctrine expressed a spirit of solidarity with the newly independent republics of Latin America. These nations in turn recognized their political affinity with the United States by basing their new constitutions, in many instances, on the North American model."

 

This was your claim: "announced (1823) it was collective defense of newly independent former colonies against their former masters"

It was false.

Thank you.

 

No. The claim was true and accurate. "Collective defense" need not derive from any formal treaty. In this case a shared interest was sufficient. The limitation here was in your understanding of the term. You lost.


TCM
Magnificent Seven, The (1960) -- (Movie ...

 

A problem common to occupiers throughout history:


Stealthy Kherson resistance fighters undermined Russian occupying forces
By Isabelle Khurshudyan and Kamila Hrabchuk

 

"Torture chamber," mass grave found in Kherson, Ukraine after Russia's retreat

NPR
Ukraine hit with onslaught of air strikes while Russian troops retreat on the ground

 

I appreciate your never-give-up-stance in regards to riding your Monroe Doctrine falsity all the way down to detonation. It takes...something to throw history and the English language out the window just so you don't admit you were wrong. You could have simply stopped posting but nope, you are going to allow me to mock you for weeks and maybe months to come.

 

Looks like Misha "won"

 

You lost.

 

Ukraine Conflict Updates

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, November 19

Click here to read the full report.

Key Takeaways

• Russian forces are reportedly beginning to reinforce their positions in occupied Luhansk, Donetsk, and eastern Zaporizhia oblasts with personnel from Kherson Oblast and mobilized servicemen.
• US intelligence officials stated that Russian and Iranian officials finalized a deal in early November to manufacture Iranian drones on Russian territory.
• Ukrainian forces continued counteroffensive operations on the Svatove-Kreminna line.
• Russian forces maintained their offensive operations around Bakhmut, Avdiivka, and west of Donetsk City despite reports of high losses around Bakhmut.
• Russian forces continued efforts to fortify areas around ground lines of communication in southern Ukraine while struggling with the partial loss of the use of the Kerch Strait Bridge.
• Russian media sources continued active discussions of an impending second wave of mobilization.
• The number of Russian prisoners appears to have dropped by about 6.5% since January of 2022 likely due to intensive Wagner Group recruitment.
• Russian authorities are working to establish control over the information space in occupied territories and identify Ukrainian partisans. . . .

Ukrainian forces continued their counteroffensive operations throughout the Svatove-Kreminna line on November 19. The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed that Russian forces repelled Ukrainian attacks in the directions of Chervonopopivka (about 6km northwest of Kreminna) and Ploshchanka (about 20km southwest of Svatove).[11] A Russian milblogger noted that Ukrainian forces returned to positional battles following their unsuccessful attempts to assault Russian positions in Chervonopopivka.[12] Luhansk People’s Republic’s (LNR) Deputy Interior Minister Vitaly Kiselev claimed that Russian forces continued to repel Ukrainian attacks in the Kuzemivka area (approximately 13km northwest of Svatove), and a Russian milblogger claimed that Ukrainian and Russian forces are engaged in the most difficult battles west of Kuzemivka in Novoselivka.[13]The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Russian forces shelled settlements along the Svatove-Kreminna frontline.[14] . . .

Ukrainian forces continued targeting Russian force concentrations and military assets south of the Dnipro River. The Ukrainian General Staff reported that Ukrainian forces struck a Russian force concentration area in Mykhailivka, 38km south of Kherson City on the R57 highway, killing 60 personnel and wounding 70 personnel.[30] Ukraine’s Southern Operational Command reported that Ukrainian forces struck a Russian force concentration in the Kinburn Spit, killing seven personnel and destroying two armored vehicles.[31] . . . .

 

You lost.

 

This was your claim about the Monroe Doctrine: "announced (1823) it was collective defense of newly independent former colonies against their former masters"

It was false.

Thank you.

 

And as pointed out several times, "collective defense" need not derive from a treaty.
You lost.

 

"Torture chamber," mass grave found in Kherson, Ukraine after Russia's retreat

Financial Times
Russians struggle to make sense of Ukraine war after Kherson retreat

 

Department of Defense
“Why Ukraine Matters” Remarks by Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III at the Halifax I

 

Please quote Monroe specifying that his doctrine calls for collective defense

 

December 2, 1823: Seventh Annual Message (Monroe Doctrine)
https://millercenter.org › presidential-speeches › decem...

The people being with us exclusively the sovereign, it is indispensable that full information be laid before them on all important subjects, to enable them to ...

". . . The political system of the allied powers is essentially different in this respect from that of America. This difference proceeds from that which exists in their respective Governments; and to the defense of our own, which has been achieved by the loss of so much blood and treasure, and matured by the wisdom of their most enlightened citizens, and under which we have enjoyed unexampled felicity, this whole nation is devoted.

We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere, but with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States.

In the war between those new Governments and Spain we declared our neutrality at the time of their recognition, and to this we have adhered, and shall continue to adhere, provided no change shall occur which, in the judgment of the competent authorities of this Government, shall make a corresponding change on the part of the United States indispensable to their security.

The late events in Spain and Portugal shew that Europe is still unsettled. Of this important fact no stronger proof can be adduced than that the allied powers should have thought it proper, on any principle satisfactory to themselves, to have interposed by force in the internal concerns of Spain. To what extent such interposition may be carried, on the same principle, is a question in which all independent powers whose governments differ from theirs are interested, even those most remote, and surely none more so than the United States.

Our policy in regard to Europe, which was adopted at an early stage of the wars which have so long agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless remains the same, which is, not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of its powers; to consider the government de facto as the legitimate government for us; to cultivate friendly relations with it, and to preserve those relations by a frank, firm, and manly policy, meeting in all instances the just claims of every power, submitting to injuries from none.

But in regard to those continents circumstances are eminently and conspicuously different. It is impossible that the allied powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can anyone believe that our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form with indifference. If we look to the comparative strength and resources of Spain and those new Governments, and their distance from each other, it must be obvious that she can never subdue them. It is still the true policy of the United States to leave the parties to themselves, in the hope that other powers will pursue the same course. . . ."

You lost.

 

I would have thought it impossible that anyone could have read that speech and thought it was a call for collective defense, and yet here you are. So you failed the challenge, you just can't admit it,

 

You lost.

 

This was your claim about the Monroe Doctrine: "announced (1823) it was collective defense of newly independent former colonies against their former masters"

It was false.

Thank you.

 

My claim was accurate, as documented. You have only your unsupported denial.
You lost.

 

Excuse me for interrupting, but why are you discussing the Monroe doctrine? It's like 200 years in the past? What is the significance for 21st century Earth?

 

It is of interest to us. If you're really interested, please follow the exchange back to its origin.

 

Ukraine Conflict Updates

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, November 20

Click here to read the full report.

ISW is publishing an abbreviated campaign update today, November 20. This report discusses the rising influence of the milblogger (military correspondent or voenkor) community in Russia despite its increasingly critical commentary on the conduct of the war. The milblogger community reportedly consists of over 500 independent authors and has emerged as an authoritative voice on the Russian war. The community maintains a heavily pro-war and Russian nationalist outlook and is intertwined with prominent Russian nationalist ideologists. Milbloggers’ close relationships with armed forces – whether Russian Armed Forces, Chechen special units, Wagner Group mercenaries, or proxy formations – have given this community an authoritative voice arguably louder in the Russian information space than the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD). Russian President Vladimir Putin has defended the milbloggers from MoD attacks and protected their independence even as he increases oppression and censorship throughout Russia.

Key inflections in ongoing military operations on November 20:

• The Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) reported on November 20 that Russian special services are planning false flag attacks on Belarusian critical infrastructure facilities to pressure the Belarusian military to enter the war in Ukraine.
• The Ukrainian General Staff added that Ukrainian officials have not observed the formation of any Belarusian assault groups. ISW continues to assess that it is unlikely that Belarusian forces will invade Ukraine.
• Russian and Ukrainian sources reported ongoing fighting along the Svatove-Kreminna line on November 20. Russian sources noted that deteriorating weather conditions are impacting hostilities.
• A Ukrainian military official stated that Ukrainian forces have liberated 12 settlements in Luhansk Oblast since the start of the eastern counteroffensive.
• The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) claimed to strike a Ukrainian troop concentration in the area of Novoselivske, Luhansk Oblast. The Russian MoD previously claimed to repel Ukrainian attacks on the settlement, and this claim might indicate that Ukrainian forces advanced to the settlement.
• Russian forces continued offensive operations in the Bakhmut, Avdiivka, and western Donetsk directions.
• Ukrainian officials reported that Russian forces continued to transfer some forces from the east (left) bank of the Dnipro River to other operational directions, but still maintain a significant force presence in southern Kherson Oblast.
• Ukrainian and Russian sources reported that shelling damaged the infrastructure of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP). One Russian milblogger claimed that the shelling came from Russian-controlled territory south of the plant, but most Russian sources accused Ukraine.
• Russian occupation officials may have purged the occupation Mayor of Enerhodar Alexander Volga. Some Russian sources claimed that Volga received a promotion within the occupation administration.
• Russian military officials continued mobilization measures amid reports of ongoing resistance and poor conditions.