Russian special military operation in Ukraine #19

This island is a good bait. UkroNazis fall for it time and again. Must be the british "advisors". They are only good in info wars and not the real one.

Another one bites the dust.

The next small cauldron soon getting closed.

We are 120 days in the SMO and the UkroNazis are still holding mass meeting of high-ranking officers close to the frontline, moving hardware in broad daylight and let soldiers and mercenaries live and train in barracks. As is Russia had no long-range precision strike capacity. Those NATO advisors must be real pros!

Arkanghelsk wrote:
To think a gas station with nukes and that dummy Putin could have done all that with some unguided rockets and a good attitude

Think in this way..

-You can paint a very big house , hiring professional workers , with a lot of experience ,and get the job done in a weak ,with spectacular results.

- Or you can do the same job using your own hands , without any painting tools , just your empty hands for it. In the end the job can be done ,but in an incredibly inefficient and retarded way.


Russia have been fighting in Ukraine for 3-4 months most times , in an incredibly inefficient way ,
saving a ton of money using super cheap unguided weapons , but costing Russia later more in the end with so many dozens of thousands of soldiers in seriously wounded for life or killed .people that the state will have to finance them or their families. and the money they saved in weapons ,have to spend it later in health support to their injured soldiers.


IF the Russian military did their job right , with the right weapons , modern weapons with Ultra precision , from the very start ,and the standard equipment , like strike drones ,glide bombs ,loitering munition in big numbers , they could have routed ukrainian army from those trenches in the very first week of war ,and forced Ukraine to surrender ,after capturing 100,000 soldiers.

But by going the most inadequate way , allowing those ukie drones to strike their convoys ,iwth very poor air support.. It encouraged NATO to continue sending more weapons , thinking they had achance to defeat russia. Showing weakness in Ukraine , is bad for russia.. because encourage nATO To provide more and more weapons to Ukraine. and this is Russia biggest mistake..

was not well prepared to fight Ukraine, even lost a destroyer to a nation without navy against so called "useless baykatar drones" or super slow anti ship missiles.

Waiting for reverse sanctions of gas to work against Europe ? Shortage of fuel and grain and cooking oil ?  Demonstrations in some countries against price rises ? Yes , but they do not connect the dots . The population does not come out in a  cohesive and unified way against the cause , the war . They have simple economic demands .

Like , I used to think , that possession of nukes alone , will drive the population in the West to rise against their government war policies . All that happened was that some mothers chained themselves to the fence of Air force base containing nuke warheads . Others bought nuke shelters to " survive " the nuclear winter !

The fire bombing of German cities and killing civilians ,  like Dresden by RAF , was supposed to turn the population against the war . All that it  managed to do , is kill tens of thousands of civilians , but no popular uprising .

Then again my idea of maintaining economic links with the West , even in the face of skirmishes between East and West , to encourage the civilian sector against the military sector ! But no Farmer or Worker in the West , can bring about political pressure against the wars of MIC against the East . But the Generals always have their war  and people take easily to hatred and killing .

I found no Bread in my local shop recently , so I learned how to make Bread , in case of further shortages . I boil my meat now , instead of frying , to save on cooking oil . And I buy less food to pay for fuel . This is what I do . This is what European public will do . The human capacity for suffering is immense .So don't wait for revolutions !

And they stopped Russian diplomats from going to Serbia ? And they stop a train in Kaliningrad ? And what else do they do ? And they gather their will and muster some bravery ? Did the Americans attack all these nations simultaneously ? No ! They did it one at a time . Korea , Vietnam , ........Syria . Over and over again . Sure Russia should and must respond . But it must finish one war , before starting another . It is not as though , it is a stalemate in Ukraine . A couple of months and LDPR will be liberated . A few months after that , Odessa will be liberated . Then comes Kaliningrad .......Serbia , Syria .

About hiring a professional painter to paint your house ! I did this once , and it was a bad job ! The paint peeled off . And the professional painter , will be out of the job , if he does a good job ! So like a professional dentist , or politician , he will keep you dependent . I used a simple tool , to clean my walls . It looks great . Don't need the expense of a painter .

Hole wrote:
The next small cauldron soon getting closed.

We are 120 days in the SMO and the UkroNazis are still holding mass meeting of high-ranking officers close to the frontline, moving hardware in broad daylight and let soldiers and mercenaries live and train in barracks. As is Russia had no long-range precision strike capacity. Those NATO advisors must be real pros!

I can't understand this Ukrainian obsession with snake island. The army being grounded in Donbass and they preoccupied an islet with little strategic relevance for the current course of operation. Worse for them.

Vann7 wrote:
IF the Russian military did their job right , with the right weapons , modern weapons with Ultra precision , from the very start ,and the standard equipment , like strike drones ,glide bombs ,loitering munition in big numbers , they could have routed ukrainian army from those trenches in the very first week of war ,and forced Ukraine to surrender ,after capturing 100,000 soldiers.

You are either retarded or you watched too much BS from Hollywood.
RuAF is using everything you mentioned plus much more you haven't seen in Hollywood movies.

Ned86 wrote:

Vann7 wrote:
IF the Russian military did their job right , with the right weapons , modern weapons with Ultra precision , from the very start ,and the standard equipment , like strike drones ,glide bombs ,loitering munition in big numbers , they could have routed ukrainian army from those trenches in the very first week of war ,and forced Ukraine to surrender ,after capturing 100,000 soldiers.

You are either retarded or you watched too much BS from Hollywood.
RuAF is using everything you mentioned plus much more you haven't seen in Hollywood movies.

In at least some elements I agree with Vann... Clearly there is a lack of sophisticated drones in quantity like the American MQ-1 Predator. It would make a big difference on the battlefield. Could also use the T 90 M on a larger scale. As a counterpoint, use Kalibr and Iskander in large numbers, which are a last generation weapon. Even so, I think that the initial problems of the Russian army were due to misguided tactics, not due to the weapons used.

Still available in huge quantities.

ludovicense wrote:

Ned86 wrote:

Vann7 wrote:
IF the Russian military did their job right , with the right weapons , modern weapons with Ultra precision , from the very start ,and the standard equipment , like strike drones ,glide bombs ,loitering munition in big numbers , they could have routed ukrainian army from those trenches in the very first week of war ,and forced Ukraine to surrender ,after capturing 100,000 soldiers.

You are either retarded or you watched too much BS from Hollywood.
RuAF is using everything you mentioned plus much more you haven't seen in Hollywood movies.

In at least some elements I agree with Vann... Clearly there is a lack of sophisticated drones in quantity like the American MQ-1 Predator. It would make a big difference on the battlefield. Could also use the T 90 M on a larger scale. As a counterpoint, use Kalibr and Iskander in large numbers, which are a last generation weapon. Even so, I think that the initial problems of the Russian army were due to misguided tactics, not due to the weapons used

Drones are irrelevant to this war

Tb2 bayraktar showed its insufficiency to help take a tiny island that have some Pantsirs and Tor missiles 

Global Hawk is easy to shoot down, Iranian shot it down , but Russia let's USA watch the war in real time 

Russia has some 50 Inokhodets drones , but they will simply change the tactics, not the overall strategic / operational situation on the ground

ludovicense wrote:

Ned86 wrote:

Vann7 wrote:
IF the Russian military did their job right , with the right weapons , modern weapons with Ultra precision , from the very start ,and the standard equipment , like strike drones ,glide bombs ,loitering munition in big numbers , they could have routed ukrainian army from those trenches in the very first week of war ,and forced Ukraine to surrender ,after capturing 100,000 soldiers.

You are either retarded or you watched too much BS from Hollywood.
RuAF is using everything you mentioned plus much more you haven't seen in Hollywood movies.

In at least some elements I agree with Vann... Clearly there is a lack of sophisticated drones in quantity like the American MQ-1 Predator. It would make a big difference on the battlefield. Could also use the T 90 M on a larger scale. As a counterpoint, use Kalibr and Iskander in large numbers, which are a last generation weapon. Even so, I think that the initial problems of the Russian army were due to misguided tactics, not due to the weapons used.

Someone who thinks you could kill 50.000 soldiers in trenches and fortifications with suicide drones or glide bombes lives in fantasy land.

What difference did this so-called "sophisticated" Cessna make in Iraq or Afghanistan? None. Killing unarmed civilians in 90% of the cases.

Initial problems. Which one? Taking Kherson and most of Zaporoshye in days? Killing thousands of Nazis in Mariupol? Forming one cauldron after the other in Donbass killing tens of thousands of enemies?

No its moronic to say Russia would not benefit from having such drones in mass Ukraine could not deal with them, unlike Russia they cannot rapidly resupply lost AD.

But of course fanboys will state otherwise, it is true if Russia has fleets of drones like predators in the skies, Ukraine would be in way more pain then it is now.

Also Hole trying to bring up Afghan is fucking retarded, the Taliban did not fight in the open field, they relied on tactics that made using drones against them fairly pointless because therewasn't large concentrations of enemy forces, they are a guerilla force, they pop up attack and disperse. Sp by the time drones arrive, there is nothing present to kill.

Compare this to the current war in Ukraine and there are THOUSNDS of troops in open areas,tanks, AA systems etc, Arty that drones can hunt down and kill.

Say something else moronic because your a fanboy why don't you

So why is there a decision now, for Russian army to launch a major offensive on this Bakhmut , area?

How come they don't proceed through Lisichansk slowly as in Severodonetsk?

What is the change now in strategy, that makes it favorable to launch such a massive assault in the region?

ludovicense wrote:
In at least some elements I agree with Vann... Clearly there is a lack of sophisticated drones in quantity like the American MQ-1 Predator. It would make a big difference on the battlefield. Could also use the T 90 M on a larger scale. As a counterpoint, use Kalibr and Iskander in large numbers, which are a last generation weapon. Even so, I think that the initial problems of the Russian army were due to misguided tactics, not due to the weapons used.

Only "problem" is too much MSM inflated propaganda, which did everything to portray Russians as a incompetents maroons.
Just remember Ghost of Kiev story or all alleged Russian war crimes accusation, even accusation of looting washing machines and taking them all the way from Ukraine to Russia.

Stories about "all mighty" Bayraktars drones were inflated to win twitter battles. As I already mention, Bayraktar is good to make show but in reality it is nothing more but modern Partisan warfare.
Ukraine had 50+ of them, and yet we saw few video of Bayraktar hitting something (not necessary destroying due to munition relatively  small warheads).
On the other hand Russians were wiping Ukrainian armor with Ka-52 every single day and night. Ukraine addmited that they lost 50% of their armor which they had before the SMO. Just to remind you, second largest army in Europe lost 50% of armor, plus all those western supplied weapons.

Bonus  -->


This is probably the best video which demonstrates Russian capabilities in modern warfare.
What we can see here is that Russia has full control of the battle field. From reconnaissance & intelligence all the way to the destruction of the target with stand off smart weapons.
(If bayraktar hit building like this, it would look like 120mm grenade explosion and it would do nothing to the target)

SeigSoloyvov wrote:No its moronic to say Russia would not benefit from having such drones in mass Ukraine could not deal with them, unlike Russia they cannot rapidly resupply lost AD.

But of course fanboys will state otherwise, it is true if Russia has fleets of drones like predators in the skies, Ukraine would be in way more pain then it is now.

Also Hole trying to bring up Afghan is fucking retarded, the Taliban did not fight in the open field, they relied on tactics that made using drones against them fairly pointless because therewasn't large concentrations of enemy forces, they are a guerilla force, they pop up attack and disperse. Sp by the time drones arrive, there is nothing present to kill.

Compare this to the current war in Ukraine and there are THOUSNDS of troops in open areas,tanks, AA systems etc, Arty that drones can hunt down and kill.

Say something else moronic because your a fanboy why don't you

Where are Ukrainians in the open? Everywhere they go they either are buried in trenches, or they hide in buildings like the Free Syrian Terrorists

US army taught Ukraine to fight as a terrorist force, Ukraine ain't attacking shit in broad daylight, let alone fighting with any conventional wisdom 

Having drones would only change the delivery of strikes to Ukrainian depth, which is delivered anyway by cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, TV guided missiles, Vikhr and Ataka missiles, Kh59 missile, and many other munitions that are already being used including inokhodets and lancet and zala KUBBLA drones 

There are no such "thousands of targets" as you repeat

The 20 or so M777s are already destroyed precisely by said drones lmao 

The bulk of Ukrainian equipment is destroyed , token western arms shipments disappear 1 week after arriving

What brings you idiots out at this time anyway

Arkanghelsk wrote:So why is there a decision now, for Russian army to launch a major offensive on this Bakhmut , area?

How come they don't proceed through Lisichansk slowly as in Severodonetsk?

What is the change now in strategy, that makes it favorable to launch such a massive assault in the region?

Ukie forces are heavily dug in Lisichansk and Unlike Mari, Russia doesn't have it surrounded, attempting to push through Lisi would mean facing stiff resistance and heavy losses as that means grueling house to house fighting.

Russia might be trying to close the axis from other regions or divert Ukie manpower from that area.

You fanboys don't like it to hear but the facts are russian numbers are low in ukraine and when you have low numbers you cannot really push against a fortified enemy, you have to try and out maneuver them and I presume that's what the russians are trying to do

Arkanghelsk wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:No its moronic to say Russia would not benefit from having such drones in mass Ukraine could not deal with them, unlike Russia they cannot rapidly resupply lost AD.

But of course fanboys will state otherwise, it is true if Russia has fleets of drones like predators in the skies, Ukraine would be in way more pain then it is now.

Also Hole trying to bring up Afghan is fucking retarded, the Taliban did not fight in the open field, they relied on tactics that made using drones against them fairly pointless because therewasn't large concentrations of enemy forces, they are a guerilla force, they pop up attack and disperse. Sp by the time drones arrive, there is nothing present to kill.

Compare this to the current war in Ukraine and there are THOUSNDS of troops in open areas,tanks, AA systems etc, Arty that drones can hunt down and kill.

Say something else moronic because your a fanboy why don't you

Where are Ukrainians in the open? Everywhere they go they either are buried in trenches, or they hide in buildings like the Free Syrian Terrorists

US army taught Ukraine to fight as a terrorist force, Ukraine ain't attacking shit in broad daylight, let alone fighting with any conventional wisdom 

Having drones would only change the delivery of strikes to Ukrainian depth, which is delivered anyway by cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, TV guided missiles, Vikhr and Ataka missiles, Kh59 missile, and many other munitions that are already being used including inokhodets and lancet and zala KUBBLA drones 

There are no such "thousands of targets" as you repeat

The 20 or so M777s are already destroyed precisely by said drones lmao 

What brings you idiots out at this time anyway

Thats cute but your wrong about lots of information, Ukraine army is often exposed and in the open but the russians lack the numbers to really punish them.

I remember you said "Russia will never allow Keiv to send forces to Donbass" yet Keiv did that just unopposed, and then you made up more excuses for it.

Your a total propgangist who often states inaccurate information and when challenged to proved the proof just runs off.

So save it, Ukraines army isn't all hiding underground and only coming out at night if they where, Russia would have a far easier time as they could simply out maneuver ukie forces during the day.

The brilliance you display is truly mind boggling

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Arkanghelsk wrote:So why is there a decision now, for Russian army to launch a major offensive on this Bakhmut , area?

How come they don't proceed through Lisichansk slowly as in Severodonetsk?

What is the change now in strategy, that makes it favorable to launch such a massive assault in the region?

Ukie forces are heavily dug in Lisichansk and Unlike Mari, Russia doesn't have it surrounded, attempting to push through Lisi would mean facing stiff resistance and heavy losses as that means grueling house to house fighting.

Russia might be trying to close the axis from other regions or divert Ukie manpower from that area.

You fanboys don't like it to hear but the facts are russian numbers are low in ukraine and when you have low numbers you cannot really push against a fortified enemy, you have to try and out maneuver them and I presume that's what the russians are trying to do

That makes no sense, when this was the same situation in severodonetsk 2 weeks ago 

At the same time Zolotoye is being ringed as we speak, and major cauldrons are being closed as we speak to the south of Lisichansk 

The change in strategy, has little to do with tactical considerations

But more to do with a political change 

And my question is pointed to that change

Why kill 50 Ukrainian generals now, and mass several BSF ships ready to hit decision making centers

As well as dash through eastern donetsk now? 

What had changed politically

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Arkanghelsk wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:No its moronic to say Russia would not benefit from having such drones in mass Ukraine could not deal with them, unlike Russia they cannot rapidly resupply lost AD.

But of course fanboys will state otherwise, it is true if Russia has fleets of drones like predators in the skies, Ukraine would be in way more pain then it is now.

Also Hole trying to bring up Afghan is fucking retarded, the Taliban did not fight in the open field, they relied on tactics that made using drones against them fairly pointless because therewasn't large concentrations of enemy forces, they are a guerilla force, they pop up attack and disperse. Sp by the time drones arrive, there is nothing present to kill.

Compare this to the current war in Ukraine and there are THOUSNDS of troops in open areas,tanks, AA systems etc, Arty that drones can hunt down and kill.

Say something else moronic because your a fanboy why don't you

Where are Ukrainians in the open? Everywhere they go they either are buried in trenches, or they hide in buildings like the Free Syrian Terrorists

US army taught Ukraine to fight as a terrorist force, Ukraine ain't attacking shit in broad daylight, let alone fighting with any conventional wisdom 

Having drones would only change the delivery of strikes to Ukrainian depth, which is delivered anyway by cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, TV guided missiles, Vikhr and Ataka missiles, Kh59 missile, and many other munitions that are already being used including inokhodets and lancet and zala KUBBLA drones 

There are no such "thousands of targets" as you repeat

The 20 or so M777s are already destroyed precisely by said drones lmao 

What brings you idiots out at this time anyway

Thats cute but your wrong about lots of information, Ukraine army is often exposed and in the open but the russians lack the numbers to really punish them.

I remember you said "Russia will never allow Keiv to send forces to Donbass" yet Keiv did that just unopposed, and then you made up more excuses for it.

Your a total propgangist who often states inaccurate information and when challenged to proved the proof just runs off.

So save it, Ukraines army isn't all hiding underground and only coming out at night if they where, Russia would have a far easier time as they could simply out maneuver ukie forces during the day.

The brilliance you display is truly mind boggling

Where are they arriving from? 

Because transport is non existent from Ukrainian side 

1) the teraborona refuses to even go near the frontline, most of them would rather go to prison, or be charged with insubordination than come to front line

2) Ukraine is punished, wantonly, 50 generals were annihilated in one strike 

3) they are hiding, in the azot industrial plant, like they hid in Azovstal, and like they hide in Every other engagement thus far

To me it's surprising Russia opted to attack Severodonetsk as it did, given that supposedly the best place for VSU to defend is in cities and urban agglomeration 

Anyway am not interested in such an uneducated opinion of why Russia decided to launch a major offensive now

Maybe someone else can give insight as to why Russia has begun to speed the tempo of the SMO

1st off there is no proof such an attack happened your taking the russians word for it, but your fanboys so I get if they tell you the skie is purple you'll believe it. Regardless for a claim like that they need to show proof,

Yes, these major cauldrons, I have yet to see, weeks upon weeks upon weeks upon weeks, and the Russians so far have only created one and its not a full cauldron yet.

Russian forces cannot dash through....are you freaking insane? they do not have the manpower for that type of shit lol christ go fight in the dam war before you say such dumb shit.

No its a tactical change and it makes sense, when you have much less forces and you have a greater enemy force dug in you need to outmaneuver that entrenched force because you will never dislodge them with your weaker numbers.

This is what you fanboys don't get, in order to fully use enrichment tactics you need to quickly surround your foe, catch them off guard and quickly kill them off to move on.

If you try to play a slow game while using encirclement tactics with numerical weaker force then i will take you months if not years to win because everything needs to be done at a snails pace.

The russians command given their current manpower are using logical tactics.

It's you fanboys who seem to expect them to advance like the fucking Germans during the invasion of France despite the disadvantages the Russian army is suffering which is laughable.

The examples you listed are specific situations in regards to a specific location don't waste my time with that BS, cherry picking examples to make yourself seem right

Hole wrote:

ludovicense wrote:

Ned86 wrote:

Vann7 wrote:
IF the Russian military did their job right , with the right weapons , modern weapons with Ultra precision , from the very start ,and the standard equipment , like strike drones ,glide bombs ,loitering munition in big numbers , they could have routed ukrainian army from those trenches in the very first week of war ,and forced Ukraine to surrender ,after capturing 100,000 soldiers.

You are either retarded or you watched too much BS from Hollywood.
RuAF is using everything you mentioned plus much more you haven't seen in Hollywood movies.

In at least some elements I agree with Vann... Clearly there is a lack of sophisticated drones in quantity like the American MQ-1 Predator. It would make a big difference on the battlefield. Could also use the T 90 M on a larger scale. As a counterpoint, use Kalibr and Iskander in large numbers, which are a last generation weapon. Even so, I think that the initial problems of the Russian army were due to misguided tactics, not due to the weapons used.

Someone who thinks you could kill 50.000 soldiers in trenches and fortifications with suicide drones or glide bombes lives in fantasy land.

What difference did this so-called "sophisticated" Cessna make in Iraq or Afghanistan? None. Killing unarmed civilians in 90% of the cases.

Initial problems. Which one? Taking Kherson and most of Zaporoshye in days? Killing thousands of Nazis in Mariupol? Forming one cauldron after the other in Donbass killing tens of thousands of enemies?  

Armed drones are good at hunting enemy vehicles and troop concentrations. Don't need to implement them into your tactics and tactical groups. Just make them fly behind the enemy lines and shoot at every military vehicle you see. Very effective if the enemy has no real air power and destroyed IADS.

This war as well as the NK war were perfect for them. In the open, few AD systems, no air force, plenty of targets.

Against guerillas like in Afganistaor Iraq they aren't usefull at all since you can't differenciate soldiers from civilians or civilian cars from enemy cars...

Against an enemy that has good AD they are pretty useless but can have some success here and there.

Against an enemy that has only an air force and no AD they are good at making the enemy spend its missileson cheap targets.

Drones aren't magical but if you know how to use them they can do nasty damages. IMO russian generals are not updated on drobe technology and are still not using them effectively. We can see on the ground russian soldiers being happy with their civilian drones launching grenandes after they saw how ukrainian ones worked very well.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:1st off there is no proof such an attack happened your taking the russians word for it, but your fanboys so I get if they tell you the skie is purple you'll believe it. Regardless for a claim like that they need to show proof,

Yes, these major cauldrons, I have yet to see, weeks upon weeks upon weeks upon weeks, and the Russians so far have only created one and its not a full cauldron yet.

Russian forces cannot dash through....are you freaking insane? they do not have the manpower for that type of shit lol christ go fight in the dam war before you say such dumb shit.

No its a tactical change and it makes sense, when you have much less forces and you have a greater enemy force dug in you need to outmaneuver that entrenched force because you will never dislodge them with your weaker numbers.

This is what you fanboys don't get, in order to fully use enrichment tactics you need to quickly surround your foe, catch them off guard and quickly kill them off to move on.

If you try to play a slow game while using encirclement tactics with numerical weaker force then i will take you months if not years to win because everything needs to be done at a snails pace.

The russians command given their current manpower are using logical tactics.

It's you fanboys who seem to expect them to advance like the fucking Germans during the invasion of France despite the disadvantages the Russian army is suffering which is laughable.

The examples you listed are specific situations in regards to a specific location don't waste my time with that BS, cherry picking examples to make yourself seem right

The Russian MOD is consistent and accurate in its reporting, even underestimating the levels of casualties to VSU

In fact, the videos on the MOD were there to see of Kharkov , Nikolayev, and Dnipro being hit by kalibrs

The building where the meeting took place was recorded being hit and destroyed

Given the massive amount of Dead Ukrainians filmed on cam rotting in the sun,

I would not doubt 50 generals eliminated in 1 strike

Occams razor, why doubt the MOD which does not give fantastical numbers like your own media of 30k Russian casualties ? 

---
It is the western media with absurd and disproved reports of Russian casualties which is laughable and wrong,  with legions of western fanboys and redditors eating it up, only to be proven totally wrong by own BBC article with 3k names only? 

So given NATO advised Ukrainians to stand and fight and lose Mariupol, 

It is justifiable they would hold a meeting like this, and be destroyed 


---- 

Noone is surprised by the slow movement,  they are letting artillery do the "maneuvering" and only entering after barraging VSU for 2 weeks straight

If hohols want to keep dying by the thousands per week, then why change the strategy? 

That is why the surprising thing , is how fast they are now moving in the area

Arkanghelsk wrote:So why is there a decision now, for Russian army to launch a major offensive on this Bakhmut , area?

How come they don't proceed through Lisichansk slowly as in Severodonetsk?

What is the change now in strategy, that makes it favorable to launch such a massive assault in the region?

I'd assume that they probably know something we don't

Arkanghelsk wrote:So why is there a decision now, for Russian army to launch a major offensive on this Bakhmut , area?

How come they don't proceed through Lisichansk slowly as in Severodonetsk?

What is the change now in strategy, that makes it favorable to launch such a massive assault in the region?

NATO summit June 29th 30th may have something to do with it.

Russia sees an opportunity to exploit the more open ground its forces face in many areas. So it decides to dispel any ideas that NATO might have about Russia's military ability that might have created complacency. If so, how they do it will have been meticulously planned. We will see over the next 7-8 days.