I have early but unconfirmed reports that AFU has liberated #Mylove. Also there is barely shelling reported on AFU controlled area's in #Kherson.
— NOËL ?? ?? (@NOELreports) October 22, 2022
Like usual we are waiting for visual confirmation. Until then unconfirmed, even how strong info is ?.
Front lines in war are fluid pic.twitter.com/Ysako0iXt4
Fuentes rusas diciendo que la retirada ?? de Kherson es irreversible. Lo que les preocupa es como se lo van a explicar a la gente. La retirada será peor que la derrota en el oblast de Kharkov. pic.twitter.com/QnClrzhfhn
— Manu (@PuenteUribarri) October 22, 2022
Grey Zone:
Kherson – you can't keep it.
The tale of the city of the Scythian sun has not yet sounded in our ears, but the air has already permeated the familiar unpleasant taste, leaving a lump in the throat. I think it is clear to everyone that the situation around the Russian city has finally acquired irreversible consequences, the accomplishment of which is only a few days left.
There are only two questions, how to withdraw Russian soldiers from the front line to the left bank and how to explain all this to the people? The situation is to some extent even worse than in comparison with the retreat from the Kharkiv region after the breakthrough to Balakliya. In fact, the implementation of an organized withdrawal of first-line troops is virtually impossible. And I will be very happy to be mistaken, as in everything written below.
The first problem gives rise to the answer to the second question – and how? What's how? And how can we just leave the territory of Russia? And that is why, having gritted my teeth strongly, I do not rule out that some troops will remain on the right bank, which will become modern "Panfilov's men", and the battle will be presented almost as Stalingrad.
You should also turn to the institute of law and history. First, you need to remember that the mere possibility does not justify the irrefutable commission of the act – the motive is also inherently important. Secondly, it is worth remembering that history already has a painfully comparable experience, so, for example, in 1941, when Soviet troops retreated to the left bank of the Dnieper from the German ones, the first to blow up the Dnieper hydroelectric power station in order to prevent the advance of the latter's offensive. It is not possible to estimate the scale of the dead to this day, but not about this.
The enemy has absolutely no motive to blow up the hydroelectric power station. The Armed Forces of Ukraine has in order to take Melitopol in the spring, the front of the battle for it is planned to open from the Zaporozhye region, as well as, in fact, to attack from Kherson. So I subjectively believe that the enemy has no goal to destroy the already abandoned city, which we simply do not have the opportunity to defend, neither so much due to the small forces and means, as in the disrupted logistics. This, by the way, goes to the question of the fact that the enemy persistently hit the bridge for three months, while we rejoice at the arrival of the Geraniums, which have absolutely no effect on anything.
Many, probably, will seem completely impossible and absolutely ridiculous, but for me nothing is impossible, as well as for the Russian guys at the front funny. I'm glad I'm wrong.