Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Monday that his top generals want to keep fighting for the eastern Donetsk city of Bakhmut, where Russian and Ukrainian forces have been locked in a heavy battle for over eight months.
Zelensky made the comments after meeting with several high-level military officials, including Gen. Valery Zaluzhny, the commander-in-chief of Ukraine’s armed forces. “They spoke in favor of continuing the defense operation and further strengthening our positions in Bakhmut,” Zelensky’s office said in a statement after the meeting.
Earlier in the day, the German tabloid Bild reported that Zaluchny gave different advice a few weeks ago by suggesting a withdrawal from Bakhmut. But Zelensky and other Ukrainian officials decided to hold on.
Some of Ukraine’s Western backers have expressed concern that Ukraine is wasting too many resources in the battle for Balhmut. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said Monday that holding the city is more “symbolic” than “strategic.”
Since mid-January, Russian forces have been making gains around Bakhmut and are close to encircling the city, which had a pre-war population of 70,000. Ukrainian forces are taking heavy casualties in the battle, and Ukrainian infantrymen told The Kyiv Independent that they are unprepared for battle and not receiving any support.
The Kyiv Independent spoke with Ukrainian soldiers while they were off the front in Kostiantynivka, a nearby city. The report said that they spoke of “unprepared, poorly-trained battalions being thrown into the front line meat grinder to survive as best they could with little support from armored vehicles, mortars, artillery, drones and tactical information.”
Explaining the lack of supporting fire for the infantrymen, a mortarman explained that they were receiving very little ammunition. “When we get ammo, we get 10 shells per day, 120-millimeter shells. That’s enough for one minute of work,” said Illia, a member of Ukraine’s National Guard. Due to the scarcity of weapons and ammunition, some Ukrainian troops are using mortars dating back to World War II.
Ukrainian soldiers are often sent to the frontline in Bakhmut after receiving very little training. Multiple soldiers told The Kyiv independent that some are barely given enough time to learn how to shoot a rifle and can be deployed to the front after being trained for only two weeks.
Both Ukraine and Russia are keeping a tight lid on casualty numbers, making it difficult to determine how many people are actually being killed in the battle for Bakhmut, but it’s clear Ukraine is taking heavy losses. One combat medic said that when his battalion first came to Bakhmut in December, there were 500 of them. But a month ago, there were only 150 left.
Ukrainian officials are claiming they are inflicting heavy Russian casualties, but it’s not clear how many Russians are dying in the battle. Ukrainian soldiers on the ground are facing off with mercenaries from the Wagner Group and regular Russian troops.
71 thoughts on “Zelensky Says Ukraine’s Top Generals Want to Keep Fighting for Bakhmut”
Gun laws for us common people? Ha! Somebody take the toys from these drug store warriors! All they ever do is sacrifice others so their political asses can be saved!
The “journalism” on this war is bonkers. Over the last week, CNN and The Guardian have solemnly informed me that “a panel of experts agree, Russia has Already Lost!” and “Ukraine on the brink of pushing Russia out of controlled territory, attack Crimea” and “Ukraine nears victory in Bakhmut” to “Russia suffering severe losses in Bakhmut” to today on CNN “Russia is close to taking Bakhmut, but at a price”.
These experts have also been assuring me of the hugeness of the stockpiles of Saddam’s WMD. I really do appreciate the value of expertise and true knowledge in almost everything, from plumbing to radiometry, from paleobiology to bicycle repair. But this bunch of bullsh1t-artists are just particularly expensive cakeholes for hire. If they have any expertise it is in knowing what sort of nonsense to blurt out is good for their paychecks.
You can’t trust the MSM. But Russia has lost. In an asymmetric war of national resistance victory by the stronger invader requires conquering territory, and occupying conquered territory until the indigenous resistance is destroyed. The indigenous defender only needs to continue to resist to ultimately prevail.
In Vietnam, the US won every battle with the VC and the NVA, but lost the war because the resistance survived.
Asymmetric wars of national resistance are determined by hearts and minds, not force of arms. Even if Russia can occupy Bakhmut, the months long battle has decisively shown which side has won the hears and minds of the people in Western Donetsk. Putin’s invasion is doomed. But in asymmetric wars of national resistance can go on for years or even decades until the imperial invader gets a government that recognizes the necessity to withdraw.
It’s not like I’m rooting for Russia. Invasions aren’t really winnable anymore, which is a damn good reason to be anti-war. In fact, us giving them weapons so they can fight a stand up war is probably killing more Ukrainians than if they formed an insurgency.
I believe in self-determination. And I believe the Ukrainians have the right to self-defense or to surrender. Itis their call. As long as the Ukrainians don’t use nukes, WMD’s or invade other countries, I leave it to the Ukrainians to determine how they will resist theinvasion.
Most of Putin’s supporters on this site wrongly believe that the West is calling the shots in Ukraine. That is not true.
Even if the US and NATO cut off support I suspect the Ukrainians would keep fighting. It would take longer for a guerrilla resistance to be effective.
“I believe in self-determination.”
Me too. But this isn’t that. It’s the US/NATO using Ukrainians as cannon fodder and anyone with an ounce of intelligence could figure that out. Including the Ukrainians. You must think they are all illiterate. And if the west wasn’t calling the shots, there would have been a peace deal in late March or early April of 2022.
Peace deal? More like a Putin takes all the occupied land type of deal is what that was.
What Red Douglas said. The fact the inimitable Boris Johnson thought it wise (which in the case of BJ it never is) to intervene on behalf of “the west” as he put it, tells you the Nato warmongers didn’t fully trust Zelensky to unnecessarily drag out the war to “weaken Russia” at the cost of his own – turns out very cheaply expendable – people.
Yes, peace deal. That’s when people stop killing each other because they mutually agree to the terms of said deal. Can you grasp that? Sadly, that deal will look good as compared to now or in the future when thousands upon thousands more will have perished, and Ukraine will be even more destroyed. But as you have made known, you’re good with that. You and Boris.
I’m good with Russia honoring and respecting the independence and sovereignty of Ukraine. I’m good with Ukrainian fighting for their freedom. And I’m good with a real peace deals, not a one sided peace deal.
But you are good with Russia taking all because you are not Ukrainian.
And why am I wasting my time talking to the guy on record supporting the invasion and annexation of Ukraine?
You too condone the killings. You have a very f up moral compass.
The one-sided peace deal you speak of was agreed upon by both sides.
I would hope Russia would give up all land taken as part of any peace deal. I don’t expect that to happen. So, does that make me pro Russia? Looking at things as to how they are and not how I want them to be seems to really bother you. Again, it’s like some sporting event to you and everyone is supposed to “root” for one side or the other.
I said the invasion was inevitable and I’ve explained why. But again, if I don’t root for the home team, I must like the other team. I agreed with the annexation of Crimea and I’ve explained why. A very large % of Crimeans agree with me.
And I don’t support any killing. I was the one arguing for the peace deal that would have saved thousands and left Ukraine’s infrastructure near intact.
“you are good with Russia taking all because you are not Ukrainian.”
You’re good with killing Russians ‘to the last Ukrainian’ cause yr not Ukrainian:
“In Lviv, a city in the West that has avoided serious shelling, wives and mothers of men in the 103rd Territorial Defense Brigade have protested, terrified about their husbands’ and sons’ deployment into combat in the East. To assuage concerns, a commander, Vitaliy Kupriy, met with about 200 women in a concert hall but the conversation devolved into screaming and crying, local media reported.” https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/01/world/europe/ukraine-russia-losses-east.html
It is up to the Ukrainians to decide when to make a peace deal. Not us in the peanut galleryo of or USA or Boris Johnson or Zelenskyy. If Ukrainians were willing to surrender their territory to get peace, then they would not be defending Bakhmut and every square inch of territory from Kherson to Mariupol to Kharkiv. Zelenskyy could not make people fight. The peace deal was born out of defeatism early in the war when everyone expected a quick Russian victory. But the Ukrainian people were not ready to be defeated. Hopefully, they will prevail in the long run.
That’s a good way of making an argument. First you completely downplay the original deal by somehow implying the average Ukrainian was aware of what a sh*tty deal it was and had a say as to whether it would get agreed upon. And once that deal fell through the Ukrainians proved you right by fighting so fiercely. I mean seriously? So, when Boris showed up at the peace talks, he was just there to remind Zelensky that the Ukrainian people wanted to fight on for every square inch of Ukraine?
Johnson was there to make an offer, not to give orders. If the Ukrainians wantd to surrender territory, they would have been defeated by now no matter how much aid US/NATO sent. This war is not about great men. It is about a people fighting to be recognized as a nation by their former imperial overlords.
Indeed, Johnson had an offer:
“The first is that Putin is a war criminal; he should be pressured, not negotiated with. And the second is that even if Ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with Putin, they are not. We can sign [an agreement] with you [Ukraine], but not with him. Anyway, he will screw everyone over,” is how one of Zelenskyy’s close associates summed up the essence of Johnson’s visit…
Johnson’s position was that the collective West, which back in February had suggested Zelenskyy should surrender and flee, now felt that Putin was not really as powerful as they had previously imagined.
Moreover, there is a chance to “press” him. And the West wants to use it.”
The Ukrainians don’t need US, UK or NATO approval to surrender their territory and make a treaty with Moscow promising not to join NATO.
Conversely, no amount of military aid can make the Ukrainians fight for their independence. They are not fighting for NATO or Zelenskyy. They are fighting for their country.
We have seen many examples of US and NATO unsuccessfully trying to instigate proxy wars. Ukraine is obviously fighting a popular resistance that money and weapons can’t buy.
We were talking specifically about Boris Johnson and what his role was in breaking up that peace deal in late March of 2022. The Ukrainians were represented at those peace talks. I posted what Johnson was there for and you ignored that and went back to talking about how the Ukrainians are fighting for their independence.
The Ukrainian negotiators may have been willing to accept Putin’s surrender terms until they heard Johnson’s offer of NATO assistance. Given the west’s offer of weapons and aid, the Ukrainians chose to exercise their right to self-defense rather than surrender. Neither you nor I have any say in the matter. I support the Ukrainian decision to fight but I would have accepted their decision to surrender. Johnson did not make the Ukrainians do anything.
One caveat is that I don’t believe the Ukrainian people would have accepted surrender even if Zelenskyy’s government agreed to it. Zelenskyy has been been very effective as a leader of a national resistance. But when leaders betray the aspirations of their people, the people choose new leaders. The history of the past year showed me that even if the Ukrainian negotiators had agreed to Putin’s term, the agreement would not have held because many Ukrainians would have joined or supported a national resistance movement.
Johnson went there to put an end to any peace deal. He didn’t go there for any other reason. And when he offered assistance, as you say, did he tell them it wouldn’t be enough to win the war and that was because he, along with the rest of the west, didn’t want to provoke Russia into a conflict that would draw them into it? Or, in other words, they wanted Ukraine to be cannon fodder for the west so they could “press” Putin.
I guess I believe the average Ukrainian is smarter than you want to believe. They would have had to be living under a rock not to see how the west was using them to weaken Russia, especially since Austin, and others, openly stated such. And since they were willing to “surrender” before getting any aid from the west, why would they be willing to fight on knowing the west wouldn’t support them enough to actually win the war? And, again, this was openly stated by the west, including Johnson. They weren’t going to provoke Russia into a large-scale war that could lead to WW3. I think any Ukrainian with normal intelligence could see what was happening and would have realized they were being used by the west and would be left high and dry.
Then why are Ukrainians fighting? I agree the West is using Ukraine as a surrogate. But I also recognize that Ukraine is using Western aid to fight a heroic (and successful) asymmetric war of national resistance against their former imperial overlords.
What choice do they have?
The same choice the Afghans and South Vietnamese had when they refused to fight for regimes they did not believe in.
“The Ukrainian negotiators may have been willing to accept Putin’s surrender terms until they heard Johnson’s offer of NATO assistance.”
False: there was no new “offer” in the visit, as the news article showed:
the US/NATO was already giving military aid, and publicly committed to doing so;
far from ‘offering’ military support, BJ’s comment about the ‘West not being ready’ to support a peace settlement actually contains a threat – the withdrawal of security in the form of diplomatic or post-war-security if Ukr. went ahead with the peace deal.
” I posted what Johnson was there for and you ignored that”
1/ you surely did post it, and yr point was super clear
2/ yr interlocutor evaded a supported, super clearly made point – blowing off the most elementary ‘social conventions’ – not just ‘rules’ but ‘civic decencies’ of argument.
3/ as you know, this kind of ‘playing w/the net down’ pervades the internet…
4/ …which doesn’t make encountering it any less annoying
you have claimed BJ was only there to “make an offer.”
wars r u.s. has supported his claim with evidence that BJ actively pressured Ukraine to drop a deal on the table;
you have failed to respond to that evidence debunking yr claim.
Yes, NATO is using Ukrainians as cannon fodder in a proxy war against Russia. But Ukrainians are also using NATO to give them the weapons they need to defeat the Russian invaders. US/NATO weapons and aid cannot give people the courage to fight for their independence. Otherwise the US would have won in Vietnam and Afghanistan. The heroism of the Ukrainians defending their homeland is not something NATO created any more than Soviet and Chinese aid created the heroism of the Vietnamese or the or the UIS aid gave the Mujahideen the courage to resist the Soviets. .
I doubt that Zelenskyy understood asymmetric people’s war when the invasion first hit. Everyone, including me, expected the Russians to take Kyiv in a few weeks. The Zelenskyy government fled to Lyiv and tried to make a deal with Russia. But the heroic resistance of the Ukrainians to the attack on Kyiv changed the dynamics of the war. This is a people’s war for liberation of Ukraine. Zelensky is like a surfer riding a wave that he didn’t create. The Ukrainians are fighting for their nation. I believe they will continue to fight even if their leadership tries to sell them out. Just like the Palestinians continue to fight despite the sell out by Fatah and the PLO.
This war is about hearts and minds. The heroic Ukrainian defense of Bakhmut once again shows that the Ukrainians are fighting for a freedom they deeply believe in. No matter who takes the city, the Ukrainian resistance has won the hearts and minds of the Ukrainian people.
So of course NATO is not acting altruistically. But I place my faith in the Ukrainian people who so far indicate that they are willing to stand up to their former imperial overlords.
At some point the US will probably cut aid to Ukraine before or after the 2024 election. But if that happens, I believe the Ukrainians will continue to resist a Russian occupation and eventually force the Russians to withdraw. It took 20 years in Afghanistan. I hope it doesn’t take that long in Ukraine. But Russia lost the hearts and minds of the Ukrainian people and that means they lost the war.
Wars-R-Us, keep fighting the good fight! We will be on the same side in Ukraine eventually. It took me a few weeks to figure out what was happening in Ukraine. But once I saw where Ukrainian hearts and minds were, the rest fell into place. People don’t fight back the way the Ukrainians are fighting back unless they believe in what they are fighting for. Remember, Ellsberg and Chomsky are not stupid or naive. Respect to you and yours!.
Hasta la victoria siempre!
I agree with this 100%.
And like always, US is thousands of miles away from their own boarders causing more suffering when this could’ve ended the war in the first 60 days in 2022. But you will be shocked to find a different outcome this time, since Russia isn’t too far away from their boarders and this could go on indefinitely.
The war will go on until the Russians get a government with the wisdom to leave Ukraine. That could be a very long time. Especially if the US cuts aid to Ukraine and the Ukrainians have to resort to guerrilla tactics. But in the long run, the Russians have lost the hearts and minds of the Ukrainian people.
Bakhmuts a good case in point. The residents are not waiting around to be liberated by the Russians. They are fleeing. Bukhmut is part of the Donbas where the Russians claim the people want to be liberated from their Ukrainian oppressors. Hearts and minds can be a mother f__ker. when an empire goes where the people don’t want to be conquered.
Russians don’t need to win the hearts and minds of Ukrainians. Besides, they didn’t like Russians to begin with because of their long history with one another. Russia just needs to eject the U.S./UK parasites out of that country and remind them about their lives prior to 2014.
Of course Russians don’t want to win the hearts and minds of Ukrainians. Unfortunately Putin’s stupid war is exacerbating all the issues that caused Russia to go to war. Ukraine is closer to US/UK/NATO/EU, the Ukrainians hate the Russians even more, NATO is revitalized with the Eastern hawks ascenent, Putin traded a security threat on Russia’s southern border for a permanent war on the Southern border, many more people have been killed in one year of fighting than i n eight years of civil war in Donbas. Putin’s blunder is even dumber than Johnson’s debacle in Vietnam because Putin should have learned from the mistakes of the US and USSR in disastrous preemptive wars in the 20th century.
“Even if Russia can occupy Bakhmut, the…battle has decisively shown which side has won the hears and minds of the people in Western Donetsk.”
Advance thanks for supporting an otherwise worthless claim.
How can the fight in Bakhmut show anything about the loyalties of “people in Western Donetsk”? – Bakhmut’s largely emptied of citizens, and the Donbas fight’s between Ukrainians conscripted from western Ukraine vs Russian and Russian-supported insurgent Ukrainians living in the Donbas.
Great. Send the generals to the front.
They have their planes fueled up to exit with CIA the first sign of Kiev getting encircled.
Of course the generals say they want to continue the fight- to say anything to the contrary will likely result in their being sacked and arrested. Then again, being beaten by ‘poorly trained Russian conscripts armed with shovels’ is pretty embarrassing in itself, and a narrative I’m pretty sure the Ukro generals would rather be dropped.
Good ! Put these “top generals” on the front lines ..
One problem we so called Christians have is ignoring the teachings of Christ. Luke 14 verses 31, 32, 33, ‘what leader going to make war against another doesn’t consider the odds when he is totally out numbered and out gunned, and before the blood shed begins he looks for a peaceful resolution’. My own interpretation but read it for yourselves. Jesus has the answer spelled out, there is nothing heroic about letting your country be destroyed for what, ???
Zelensky Says US Top Generals Want to Keep Fighting for Bakhmut
“Zelensky Says Ukraine’s Top Generals Want to Keep Fighting for Bakhmut Ukrainian soldiers fighting on the frontline say they are not prepared and aren’t being protected”
Between 12,000 and 20,000 UKA trapped in Bakhmut and no way out now.
“Zelensky Says Ukraine’s Top Generals Want to Keep Fighting for Bakhmut”
Top general confirms ‘pullout’ reversal to reporters from balustrade of presidential palace top story window
Comments are closed.