news

Currently, in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the Ukrainian army attacked the Russian mainland of Kursk. Now, Russia and Ukraine are still fighting fiercely in Kursk, and the battle reports of both sides can be said to be very impressive. Today we will talk about what happened when Ukraine launched such a large-scale combat operation against Russia.NATODid Ukraine know about it or not? Did Ukraine intentionally drag NATO into the water, that is, act first and report later? Or did NATO and Ukraine plan together to carry out such a military action?

Let's first look at the initial news that the Ukrainian army attacking Kursk, Russia, had only about 300 people, and later it was increased to more than 1,000. Now, the Russian war report alone says that it has wiped out more than 2,000 Ukrainian troops in the Kursk area, so the claim of more than 1,000 is definitely unrealistic. So the number may be 5,000 or 10,000, but we don't know. In short, it was a campaign-level operation, with several brigades jointly fighting.

When we were fighting like this, we saw that after the Ukrainian army broke into Russian territory, that is, after Kursk, some of its tanks and armored vehicles were destroyed by Russia. Among them, there were advanced tanks such as the Challenger-2 from Britain and the M777 from the United States.HimasThere are also weapons that combine missiles and artillery, as well as German "Weasel" tanks, etc. In other words, many weapons and equipment provided to him by NATO were used when attacking the Russian mainland this time.

First of all, it is weapons and equipment, and a large number of mercenaries were used, whether they were from Poland, the United States, or any other countries, in short, they were from countries other than Ukraine. So many troops and such advanced weapons and equipment were used when attacking Russian territory. Can you say that NATO was unaware? If Ukraine used these weapons and equipment, then why did NATO and the United States continue to provide more weapons and equipment to it after the news came out? Since they said we were unaware and we did not support the attack on the Russian mainland, then now that Ukraine has taken such action, you should stop supplying weapons and equipment to it. You should be pouring water on the fire, not adding fuel. If you provide more weapons and equipment, isn’t that supporting his actions? So this can prove that NATO and the United States participated in this action and knew about it. It’s just that they don’t want to say it, because saying it out may directly lead to a face-to-face confrontation with Russia.

The second point is that this operation must have received intelligence support from the United States and NATO. That is, he had a lot of intelligence support. He relied on NATO or the United States' aerial satellite reconnaissance, human resources reconnaissance, and other forms of electronic reconnaissance to provide him with information and intelligence, so that such a blitzkrieg could be successful. It should be said that the United States and NATO were aware of this situation.

The third point is that after the blitzkrieg was launched, both Russia and Ukraine have achieved very impressive results after 10 days of fighting. Ukraine said that it has occupied at least 1,000 square kilometers of Russian land, and I have occupied it, and I have established a very stable stronghold. Every day, no matter how much, I can always push an area of ​​one to several kilometers, which means constantly nibbling and "pushing" forward. Russia said on the 10th that it had killed 1,120 Ukrainian soldiers and mercenaries who invaded Ukraine in this battle. By the 11th and 12th, it said that it had wiped out more than 2,000 invaders. He said it was invaders, and we can't count whether they are Ukrainian soldiers or mercenaries.

These situations or battle reports are very impressive, so what will the result be? We say that if Ukraine can occupy more than 1,000 square kilometers of land within the Russian territory, let's talk about Kursk, or a larger area, the key is to hold on, that is, to hold on until the Russian-Ukrainian negotiations, you can be used as a bargaining chip to exchange with Russia, otherwise there is no way. Because in this combat operation, we can see that Ukraine and NATO are worried about the US election. They are worried that if Trump is really elected and really enters the White House, he will end the Russian-Ukrainian conflict in a short time or a short time as he said.

Because they believe that once Trump comes to power, he will ask Ukraine to negotiate with Russia, quickly end the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and then free up his hands. The United States will engage in great power confrontation and promote its so-called Indo-Pacific strategy. Then everyone knows what is going on. This is very unfavorable to the war situation in Ukraine. In this case, it is necessary to achieve some results, especially for Russian territory. If it can be occupied and controlled, the key is to control it until the time of negotiation.

Now let's see, if Ukraine can occupy these 1,000 square kilometers of land, no matter you took it with 300 people or 1,000 people, as long as you took it, it's good. If you can occupy, or control, and guard it until the two sides negotiate, then you have real bargaining chips, and it's not a war of public opinion or cognitive warfare, it's a real combat capability, and your combat capability is to impress the world. But if you lose these 1,000 square kilometers of positions during the negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, then you lose the bargaining chips. It can be said that your action is a tactical success and a strategic failure.