SITREP 8/3/25: Trump's Sub Scare Can't Eclipse Ukraine's Pokrovsk Collapse

Donald Trump claims to have parked nuclear subs closer to Russia after a tiff with fellow bronzer enthusiast Dmitry Medvedev. The Pentagon appeared to downplay his comments, replying they “defer” to his statements, which is a nice way of saying: “We didn’t move any subs, but let’s just give little Donnie his venting space.” Even war-hog John Bolton had to concede the move was a charade:

Of course, the act’s real motivation was Trump needing to pump himself up due to insecurity about his perceived weakness and inability to move Russia an inch on the negotiations and cessation-of-hostilities front. He needed to signal his ‘strength’, though he did it in a way that signals precisely the opposite.

Trump also made waves with his statement of mind-blowing Russian casualties, claiming that Russia suffers 20k KIA per month:

This provided ready fodder for several news cycles of the pro-UA crowd’s propaganda about massive Russian losses. It came as a much needed jolt to energize their hopes, essentially convincing them that the current frontline situation isn’t as catastrophic as it seems because Russia will eventually run out of men:

But many top Ukrainian analysts were skeptical:

Ukrainian figure Maria Berlinska the same day released a quite contrary list of loss figures for the AFU:

The above is hard to read, but she writes:

Daily killed: up to 300
Wounded: up to 750
AWOL: up to 500

In short, she writes that according to her estimates Ukraine is losing 26,500 people each month, or 318,000 per year, while Russia gains 9-10k per month and 120k per year. She estimates 159,000 per year are the hard losses for Ukraine, i.e. dead and maimed.

This is lethal for Ukraine since even Zelensky himself admits Russia gains 100k+ per year in net total manpower strength. Even if Ukraine is somehow equalizing its men, the manpower gap will grow wider and wider each year until Ukraine is totally overwhelmed. But of course: that’s where NATO’s secret plan to embroil Russia in another war with the Baltics or someone else comes into play, in order to tie those additional forces up. If by 2027 Russia has 300k more men than Ukraine but needs to send those men to Lithuania, then the Ukrainian front will retain parity.

As for Trump’s figures, we already know the US ‘intel community’ literally makes up numbers at this point. Thomas Massie had already told us about the comical ‘classified meetings’ where Ukrainian casualties are dismissed as ‘unknown’.

Even Budanov is starting to see the writing on the wall, here admitting that it is NATO and the EU that will likely collapse, not Russia:

"Although I simply hate Mr. Surkov (former aide to the President of Russia) for everything he has brought here, I fear that this is one of the possible scenarios if everything remains as it is now," Budanov said, thereby acknowledging that even his opponents might be right.

By the way, say what you will of Budanov, but as time goes on he becomes increasingly honest and is one of the few forthright Ukrainian figures whose words should be heeded and potentially trusted. He does not simply lie at will for the benefit of the state like most of his compatriots—even when opportunity readily presents itself.

Recall, when Navalny died, he went against the grain admitting that Putin had not “killed” him in prison as was the spin by cheap MSM presstitutes. Instead, he plainly stated Navalny did actually die of a heart condition and that Russian reports on this were accurate. Similarly, he recently agreed with Putin that wherever a Russian soldier steps will remain as Russian land, and Ukraine will never get it back—electing to do away with cheap jingoistic nonsense about “returning” everything that so often consumes blind supporters.

This is why Budanov’s other statement from the new interview is even more revealing. He gives a long, meandering response to essentially sketch out the likelihood that Ukraine as a nation may soon be erased from the annals of history if events continue down the path they’re heading:

That said, let’s get straight to the frontline updates as things continue to accelerate toward the natural conclusion of a few major long-fought battles.

Pokrovsk remains the main focus as Russian efforts ramp up there. Today we have geolocated footage of Russian troops calmly walking through the southern portions of the city proper, which indicates there is little resistance there anymore:

Geolocation: 48.27223, 37.15417

It’s likely that the city will be bisected in some way, with eastern portions left to be captured first.

But actually, the most pressing advances have shifted to the eastern end of the front, where Russian troops are advancing to cut off Mirnograd. Though it hasn’t been fully verified yet, latest updates show Russian forces capturing both Dorozhne and Sukhetske, which would put them one final step closer to cutting the main supply route there:

As can be seen Novoekonomichne and areas around it were also recently captured with forces pushing in from the east. Much of this is very reminiscent of the battle of Avdeevka across the railway near Stepove and down toward the terrikon. Except as can be seen now, Russian forces are moving much faster, suffering no notable losses, and Ukraine’s resistance is no longer particularly stiff around such a key fortress town.

Analyzing from a wider view, the strategy could likely be to swing south along the road and cut Mirnograd off first in order to quickly effect its full collapse, leaving only Pokrovsk to be taken alone:

They could even potentially link up with the group bisecting Pokrovsk to close the eventual cauldron.

The usual suspects are squealing:

By the way, here’s an interesting perspective for those wondering what the fall of the Pokrovsk-Mirnograd agglomeration really means.

Recall that Avdeevka was essentially the frontline from early or mid-2022. From that point forward, Avdeevka was slowly enveloped and fought for, with the final attempt to take it beginning on October 2023 and culminating around February 2024:

But after that fortress fell, the entire area from Avdeevka to the Pokrovsk agglomeration took a mere eight months or so to capture. At the time, analysts wrote that after Avdeevka fell, Russia would storm through the smaller settlements and empty fields at a rapid clip, and that’s roughly what happened.

Now, the same thing applies to Pokrovsk: the area was fought for since late last year, but once it falls, the “empty” steppe from there to Pavlograd could be gobbled up in months. Granted, from Avdeevka to Pokrovsk was about 40km and from Pokrovsk to Pavlograd is about double that—but at the same time, the AFU can be said to be doubly weak compared to back then, and are losing territory at a much faster pace.

In fact, WSJ just did a piece on an unprecedented line of defenses Ukraine is hurriedly attempting to construct behind this frontline as bulwark against precisely this future advance:

https://archive.ph/yplbU

But even WSJ was not hot on the ambitious project’s prospects:

…fortifications the country bets it can lay fast and far enough to halt Russia’s summer offensive. But the defensive gamble is facing increasingly long odds.

Well into its second year, the wider front-line program has been beset by delays, attacks and arrests for alleged corruption. It now faces being overrun by the enemy it is trying to repel.

In a clumsy attempt to follow editorial guidance to downplay Russian gains, the article strikes a hilarious contradiction:

The challenge is to hold back a Russian army bolstered by thousands of fresh recruits whom Moscow is throwing into battle for only small or symbolic gains. Ukraine’s understaffed units are struggling to defend against the onslaught as Russia shifts tactics daily and slowly chews through territory.

So, these “small” and “symbolic” gains are necessitating the most gargantuan—by WSJ’s own account—defensive fortification project of the entire war? What’s the point of embarrassing and discrediting oneself like this? If Ukraine is rushing to create vast trenchworks, it’s clearly for a reason.

The article notes Ukraine spent 2% of their entire 2024 military budget on just these fortifications, and the 2025 budget is even bigger.

Up next, Russian forces made major headway on the Krasny Liman front, stabbing out and capturing the southern portion of Torske:

Again we have geolocated footage of a flag-raise by the Russian 36th Motor Rifle Regiment of the 25th CAA:

02.08.25 Krasny Liman - Torskoe

Consequences of combat operations in the Krasny Liman area.

Russian Armed Forces servicemen raise the flag of the Russian Federation in the southern part of Torskoe, confirming confident control of the occupied part of the settlement by the Russian Armed Forces.

Advancement of the Russian Armed Forces more than 2.5 km through residential buildings in Torskoe.

Geo: 48.98944, 37.97611

The significance of this is that Russian forces are approaching Krasny Liman ever closer—and Liman is the final main fortress gateway to Slavyansk:

Just north of there Russian forces have also advanced southward:

On a neighboring front, we have a correction to make. In the last report I posted an AFU video claiming to have destroyed a clumsy Russian advance on the Seversk front. In fact, it turns out that Russian armor assault succeeded, because today we’ve had confirmation of Russian position consolidations just outside Seversk:

A final thing of interest: a reported Russian Fab-3000 bomb struck the Kherson Ostrovska bridge:

Besides the highly improved accuracy of the bomb, we must say the event showed why bridges—at least Soviet ones—are so difficult to take out:

Most interesting however is the fact that this is the only bridge connecting the entire isolated district to mainland Kherson, which means Russian forces will completely lock it out if and when they finish the bridge off.

What this could mean is that Russian forces may be gearing up to begin the piecemeal conquest of Kherson. Recall last time the Ukrainian officer’s words that the way things are going on that sector, Russia could end up storming the right bank, given that Ukraine’s losses are mounting there and there are continued reports that Russian drone teams are effectively locking out Ukrainian units with constant strikes.

Read below from a Ukrainian community leader in Kherson:

—

Some last items of note.

During Putin’s pilgrimage with Lukashenko to Valaam he made a few interesting statements. First he humorously corrected Luka that Russia is not ‘conquering’ Ukrainian territory, but rather ‘returning’ what already belongs to it:

Putin also said that Russia is not in a “hurry” to negotiate and that if Ukraine is not yet ready to meet Russian demands, then Russia can gladly wait for negotiations:

Clearly, Putin hasn’t gotten the memo that Russia is due to run out of either men or tanks sometime soon.

He also shared his perspective on sovereignty, and how the true goal of the SMO is Russia’s fight for the future of its sovereignty, in order to not end up like countries of the European Union which have given it up, which eventually leads to catastrophic economic losses. That is because once you lose your sovereignty, you become an economic vassal to a ‘master’ state—the entire purpose of geopolitics, ultimately, is economic domination, after all:

—

Zaluzhny also gave an interesting perspective of the future development of the war, remarking that the technological deadlock will in his opinion be broken within three years, though he didn’t specify by whom:

He ultimately concludes—outlandish as it may sound to most—that what Ukraine now needs most is not manpower, but “brains” to develop the future technological innovations that will presumably lead to Russia’s defeat. It appears his chief strategy relies on out-innovating Russia to the point where even a grossly under-manned Ukraine can win a long-term war of attrition. But when your own country no longer has enterprises and must rely on third parties to build virtually everything, such wishful thinking is a tall order.

—

Lastly, arch-globalist Christine Lagarde gives her impressions of the differences between working with Putin and Trump, which is sure to tickle many:

---

Your support is invaluable. If you enjoyed the read, I would greatly appreciate if you subscribed to a monthly/yearly pledge to support my work, so that I may continue providing you with detailed, incisive reports like this one.

Alternatively, you can tip here: buymeacoffee.com/Simplicius

---