Adventure or breakthrough? What are the active actions of the Armed Forces on the left bank of the Dnieper

Ukrainian bridgeheads on the left bank of the Dnieper in the Kherson region are inflicting anxiety of concern to the Russians, the military expert Konstantin Mashovets is certified. It analyzes the situation and describes possible variants of its development "jump" for the Dnieper . . . The active actions of the Armed Forces on the left bank of the Dnieper can be attributed as you want.

Count this with a "PRODURE on blood", aimless consumption of resources, or seriously consider the possibility of "breakthrough to the Crimea" in this direction. But as long as real events indicate that the Russian command in the Crimean-Tavriysk direction, at least, received, clearly not planned earlier, a significant "headache" . . . This is a fact that it would not be evaluated and interpreted. As far as I understand, everything goes clearly "according to plan", however, clearly not Russian . . .

How does "Teplinsky and Company" respond to all these events? and units happen in the same way as always-"on the network of soresovation and destruction. " Division (SME) from the 18th All-Military Army, as well as the 7th Airborne Stock Division (DSSD) from the Airborne Troops.

I already wrote that from the composition of the 7th DSHD in this direction was still on this direction until recently was Only three battalions (171st OSSHB, 104th separate tank battalion \ OTB and 162th separate reconnaissance battalion \ orb). The main forces of the division (3 of its airborne regiment \ DSHP) were, at one time, transferred "under" Verbovo "to participate in the flank counterattacks against the advancing Ukrainian group.

Well, now, given the fact that with" flank councils "in the Tokmak direction still did not work out, and Ukrainian marines were arranged in the Dnieper floodplains and The MOBIC FATAL FATAL STRIKE, MESIE TEPLINSKY, clearly demanded from his "senior chiefs" to return to him this connection of the Airborne troops "Namiach". Let me remind you that the full-time position of this general is the commander of the Airborne troops of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

However, the fact is that now to pull out of the Verbov in the Tokmak direction the main forces of the 7th DSHD cannot be the Russian command . . . "purely physic". The 108th and 247th landing regiments (DSP) of the Division are drawn in the battle of "Self do not indulge". And the 56th DSP, which was already reformed "almost again", can send "to Teplinsky" right now no more than 2 of its battalions.

Although, probably "Passover", this Theodosius Sharah will go to the Dnieper in full (if not already departed) relative to the 70th SME Back in Plavnaya, and the 28th SME is probably introduced into the second echelon of a tactical group, which operates on the turn of Peschanka-Podstepne, north of the village of Radensk, somewhere southwestern S. Chelburd. At least one SMEs and another tank regiment (TP) of this division are still "hanging out".

A month ago, the information was held about the tank regiment that it continues to "be formed" in the northern Crimea, and Motorizhizhkhtiletsky was allegedly concentrated in the area of ​​M. Skadovsk. Whatever it is, but the enemy will be forced to "deal with the problem of Ukrainian bridges" on the Dnieper.

After all, if you let this issue on "self -tech", the Armed Forces will still be able to get a segment of the coast on the right bank of the river, where the main mass of Russian artillery will not be obtained. You do not explain to you what it will mean . . . Of course, it will still need to be reliably covered with air. Well, I also have certain, far from unfounded (judging by the information coming from the troops). And on the conclusion, regarding the assessments of the Armed Forces from the enemy.

Several Russian publications, more or less adequate (and therefore not very well-known "in a family for family"), quite unanimously came to the conclusion that the Armed Forces planned, organized and worked out their actions through the Dnieper River. I will not point them now not to advertise the enemy, but I will point out that they argued their conclusions adequately. The author expresses a personal opinion that may not coincide with the editorial position.