Why are the Russians so desperate for Bakhmut? Just to have a win? This feels like very Verdun or Stalingrad. The city itself is fucked up from the war, it’s not that much value at that point for either side, other than symoblic victory. The Ukrainians are doing good in not as hard trying to take the city itself and rather use it as a bait to destroy Russian troops.
It’s their battle of Bunker Hill.
Bakhmut was a large city in the area but without great strategic value and and the Russian high command ordered it to be captured. The Ukrainian army saw this opportunity to wear out the Russian army, which used the Wagner group and low-quality troops (convicts and minorities) in a meat grinder. After months of friction in the area, what was left was a position that cost more than it should have been to be captured and that now needs to be defended with the remainder of the troops and the withdrawal of the Wagner group from the area worsened the situation.
It’s pretty normal in authoritarian dictatorship were the only unforgivable action for the dictator is “look weak” by giving up on something that has cost a lot to get (even if it is worthless).
It’s pretty smart of the Ukranian leadership to use this russian regime weakness against them.
nope, I know that his was spread around everywhere by Russian sympathizers, but the reality is that Russia chose Bakhmut not because of its strategic importance but because they could supply it from both the northern and southeastern supply lines, the town is in a valley, its outside artillery range of the Russian and Ukrainian supply line Trunks, etc… what make the town special was the Russian propaganda because it was the one place they could adequately supply, and the ability of the UA forces to kill Russians in insane ratios
From what I read the importance is only for Bakhmut itself, if you look on the map the city is just a point, we are talking about 6km of a 140km front line (from Bakhmut to the border with Russia). Unlike the Kerch Bridge, there are several other roads and railways to carry out logistics in the region, it is not as if this were the only option.
Another detail is that these roads are so close to the front line that they all can be harassed by any artillery system in operation on both sides.
but what do I know? I’m just spitting out what I read, but the consensus seems to be that Bakhmut has consumed and is consuming more resources than it is worth, and I have read several times by different analysts the comparison between Bunker Hill and Bakhmut.
Why are the Russians so desperate for Bakhmut? Just to have a win? This feels like very Verdun or Stalingrad.
I don’t know about Bakhmut, but holding Stalingrad had a great strategic importance. The Soviets and Nazis didn’t commit so many forces there just to hold an arbitrary village. It feels weird that you mention it as if there was no real point to it.
Why are the Russians so desperate for Bakhmut? Just to have a win? This feels like very Verdun or Stalingrad. The city itself is fucked up from the war, it’s not that much value at that point for either side, other than symoblic victory. The Ukrainians are doing good in not as hard trying to take the city itself and rather use it as a bait to destroy Russian troops.
It’s their battle of Bunker Hill. Bakhmut was a large city in the area but without great strategic value and and the Russian high command ordered it to be captured. The Ukrainian army saw this opportunity to wear out the Russian army, which used the Wagner group and low-quality troops (convicts and minorities) in a meat grinder. After months of friction in the area, what was left was a position that cost more than it should have been to be captured and that now needs to be defended with the remainder of the troops and the withdrawal of the Wagner group from the area worsened the situation.
Russia is doing “strategy” by Sunk Cost Falacy.
It’s pretty normal in authoritarian dictatorship were the only unforgivable action for the dictator is “look weak” by giving up on something that has cost a lot to get (even if it is worthless).
It’s pretty smart of the Ukranian leadership to use this russian regime weakness against them.
isn’t there a strategically important road near Bakhmut that becomes available if you take the area?
nope, I know that his was spread around everywhere by Russian sympathizers, but the reality is that Russia chose Bakhmut not because of its strategic importance but because they could supply it from both the northern and southeastern supply lines, the town is in a valley, its outside artillery range of the Russian and Ukrainian supply line Trunks, etc… what make the town special was the Russian propaganda because it was the one place they could adequately supply, and the ability of the UA forces to kill Russians in insane ratios
From what I read the importance is only for Bakhmut itself, if you look on the map the city is just a point, we are talking about 6km of a 140km front line (from Bakhmut to the border with Russia). Unlike the Kerch Bridge, there are several other roads and railways to carry out logistics in the region, it is not as if this were the only option. Another detail is that these roads are so close to the front line that they all can be harassed by any artillery system in operation on both sides. but what do I know? I’m just spitting out what I read, but the consensus seems to be that Bakhmut has consumed and is consuming more resources than it is worth, and I have read several times by different analysts the comparison between Bunker Hill and Bakhmut.
I don’t know about Bakhmut, but holding Stalingrad had a great strategic importance. The Soviets and Nazis didn’t commit so many forces there just to hold an arbitrary village. It feels weird that you mention it as if there was no real point to it.