Discussion - Russia's Hard Limits in Evolving Battle (in)-Effectiveness
Hi all. Time for a chin wag, share your thoughts, ideally in good faith. Let's start from here - Russia's Battle Plan Tactics at this point are basically as follows:
1. Front Line Infiltration - Bum rush small infiltration teams into softest areas possible, hope Ukraine's organized defenses retreat.
2. Terror From Distance - Long range attacks on infrastrcutre and civilian targets. You know - terrorism.
3. Keep doing 1 & 2, until Ukraine gives you something to make it stop.
What "works" as an infiltration strategy is not a great occupation strategy. The point of a war of conquest is to take and hold territory, and then get gains from it later.
There's literally thousands of videos of evidence of small <5 man teams griding forward, and then they get killed, either immediately, or eventually, or - Ukraine decides the area is not worth it and retreats a bit to the next line of defense. This appears to be a way of life right now - and is cost-ineffective from Russia's perspective. Thrusting a low-functioning grunt into a blasted puddle of grey rainwater only gives you the benefits of occupation if Ukraine agrees to stop killing them. Then they move from the battlefield into local barracks, reconstruction begins, and then the state reaps benefits from their newly stolen land.
PROBLEM FOR RUSSIA: But the hard limit here is - if Ukraine never stops killing your occupation forces. As seen in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan - even if areas are temporarily 'pacified', the ongoing bleed of killing occupation forces is an open wound for an army. AND - reconstruction costs are expensive and are themselves, soft targets. Eventually, they have no choice but to assess it's not worth it, and leave.
Russia doesn't seem like they can
a) stop ukrainian drone production or
b) stop the effective deployment of drones on the battlefield.
Drones account for the VAST majority of Russian infantry deaths at this point, which makes Russian Tactic #1 - Send Infiltration Teams Forward To Die - totally ineffective as a war winning strategy until Ukraine decides to stop killing them.
So - Russian Tactic #2 - Terror From Distance - Ukraine can improve defences, but can't stop it completely, but - this has never been a successful way of defeating industrialized societies with strong international backing. You would need WW2-levels of sustained industrial heavy bombing, which would put their irreplaceable strategic bomber assets at grave risk of being destroyed. And which also, if you succeed, increases your reconstruction costs on territory you consider to be "yours". ANNNNND it increases the chance of humaniatian outcry and the creation of a no-fly zone from willing NATO partners. This strategy is designed to destroy societal infrastructure to the point where organized resistance is barely possible. It works in 3rd world countries, (Syria, Africa) that the West doesn't really care about, but doesn't work as well in more advanced societies with external backers who are pot committed to Ukraine's future existence.
PROBLEM FOR RUSSIA: Even a large stand-off bombing campaign is extremely resource intensive, uses finite lifespan of air assets you can't replace as fast as are being lost and depleted, uses EXPENSIVE and scarce inputs to manufacture. Probably, China will keep Russia JUST well enough supplied to keep this terror campaign going, but not well enough to enable Russia to rebuild a credible threat back to China itself down the line. The superior U.S. air force isn't doing very well in Iran with this strategy, seems reasonable to expect that the much shittier Russian air force doesn't have the jam to win the war by itself.
This war is an all-in bet for Russia, you would have to think. There wont' be another chance to conquer Ukraine for generations, and Russia is going to have some painful decades ahead as a global pariah and vassal of China after the shooting stops.
Nukes don't solve anything, and don't make a lot of sense when you're trying to steal land, population and industrial capacity. Destroying land you say is yours means you're shrinking The Prize of invasion. Russia's Infiltration and Terror Strategy probably has no realistic chance of achieving the strategic regime change and territorial seizure that Russia needs to make any kind of claim of victory.
So - what in the name of Vodka milkshakes do they do? Russian military Philosophy of the last century has been Horde War - an overwhelming mass of armor, artillery, men and cruelty. And that it was fine if your stuff wasn't as good as NATO's, as long as you had enough of it, because you could push from Poland to Paris to Portgual, before the the feckless Western pussies could organize a response. That was the thinking anyways, and the NATO plan was to pause that Russian mass with nukes while they setup a Central European defensive line.
But the Ukraine war's addition of drones at scale and the revealed weakness of the Russian Horde Inevitability theory paired with truly terrible logistics limiting how fast the Russians can move forward, even without the dogged resistance. This ridiculous vanity war is not only Russia losing it's last shot at retaining the jewel of the Russian Empire, but it's also the defeat of their entire way of war. They're a 20th century army fighting a 21st century war with 11th century brutality.
What Does Russia Do? There doesn't seem to be a way for Russia to "win" the war on anything approaching their demanded terms. Even the Trump card has already been played - U.S. support was pulled, and it's made no real difference. The Ukraine of 2025+ can resist the Russian army without U.S. inputs. Ukraine's defiance of Russia and Trump has only increased since Agent Krasnov did everything he could initially. Now, he seems determined to force a global recession to try and indirectly erode the financial backing that enables Ukraine's remianing supporters.
What Does Ukraine Do? Keep fighting until there is a major change to the political leadership next door.
How & when does this end? Your thoughts plz. Cheers Amigos.
1. Front Line Infiltration - Bum rush small infiltration teams into softest areas possible, hope Ukraine's organized defenses retreat.
2. Terror From Distance - Long range attacks on infrastrcutre and civilian targets. You know - terrorism.
3. Keep doing 1 & 2, until Ukraine gives you something to make it stop.
What "works" as an infiltration strategy is not a great occupation strategy. The point of a war of conquest is to take and hold territory, and then get gains from it later.
There's literally thousands of videos of evidence of small <5 man teams griding forward, and then they get killed, either immediately, or eventually, or - Ukraine decides the area is not worth it and retreats a bit to the next line of defense. This appears to be a way of life right now - and is cost-ineffective from Russia's perspective. Thrusting a low-functioning grunt into a blasted puddle of grey rainwater only gives you the benefits of occupation if Ukraine agrees to stop killing them. Then they move from the battlefield into local barracks, reconstruction begins, and then the state reaps benefits from their newly stolen land.
PROBLEM FOR RUSSIA: But the hard limit here is - if Ukraine never stops killing your occupation forces. As seen in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan - even if areas are temporarily 'pacified', the ongoing bleed of killing occupation forces is an open wound for an army. AND - reconstruction costs are expensive and are themselves, soft targets. Eventually, they have no choice but to assess it's not worth it, and leave.
Russia doesn't seem like they can
a) stop ukrainian drone production or
b) stop the effective deployment of drones on the battlefield.
Drones account for the VAST majority of Russian infantry deaths at this point, which makes Russian Tactic #1 - Send Infiltration Teams Forward To Die - totally ineffective as a war winning strategy until Ukraine decides to stop killing them.
So - Russian Tactic #2 - Terror From Distance - Ukraine can improve defences, but can't stop it completely, but - this has never been a successful way of defeating industrialized societies with strong international backing. You would need WW2-levels of sustained industrial heavy bombing, which would put their irreplaceable strategic bomber assets at grave risk of being destroyed. And which also, if you succeed, increases your reconstruction costs on territory you consider to be "yours". ANNNNND it increases the chance of humaniatian outcry and the creation of a no-fly zone from willing NATO partners. This strategy is designed to destroy societal infrastructure to the point where organized resistance is barely possible. It works in 3rd world countries, (Syria, Africa) that the West doesn't really care about, but doesn't work as well in more advanced societies with external backers who are pot committed to Ukraine's future existence.
PROBLEM FOR RUSSIA: Even a large stand-off bombing campaign is extremely resource intensive, uses finite lifespan of air assets you can't replace as fast as are being lost and depleted, uses EXPENSIVE and scarce inputs to manufacture. Probably, China will keep Russia JUST well enough supplied to keep this terror campaign going, but not well enough to enable Russia to rebuild a credible threat back to China itself down the line. The superior U.S. air force isn't doing very well in Iran with this strategy, seems reasonable to expect that the much shittier Russian air force doesn't have the jam to win the war by itself.
This war is an all-in bet for Russia, you would have to think. There wont' be another chance to conquer Ukraine for generations, and Russia is going to have some painful decades ahead as a global pariah and vassal of China after the shooting stops.
Nukes don't solve anything, and don't make a lot of sense when you're trying to steal land, population and industrial capacity. Destroying land you say is yours means you're shrinking The Prize of invasion. Russia's Infiltration and Terror Strategy probably has no realistic chance of achieving the strategic regime change and territorial seizure that Russia needs to make any kind of claim of victory.
So - what in the name of Vodka milkshakes do they do? Russian military Philosophy of the last century has been Horde War - an overwhelming mass of armor, artillery, men and cruelty. And that it was fine if your stuff wasn't as good as NATO's, as long as you had enough of it, because you could push from Poland to Paris to Portgual, before the the feckless Western pussies could organize a response. That was the thinking anyways, and the NATO plan was to pause that Russian mass with nukes while they setup a Central European defensive line.
But the Ukraine war's addition of drones at scale and the revealed weakness of the Russian Horde Inevitability theory paired with truly terrible logistics limiting how fast the Russians can move forward, even without the dogged resistance. This ridiculous vanity war is not only Russia losing it's last shot at retaining the jewel of the Russian Empire, but it's also the defeat of their entire way of war. They're a 20th century army fighting a 21st century war with 11th century brutality.
What Does Russia Do? There doesn't seem to be a way for Russia to "win" the war on anything approaching their demanded terms. Even the Trump card has already been played - U.S. support was pulled, and it's made no real difference. The Ukraine of 2025+ can resist the Russian army without U.S. inputs. Ukraine's defiance of Russia and Trump has only increased since Agent Krasnov did everything he could initially. Now, he seems determined to force a global recession to try and indirectly erode the financial backing that enables Ukraine's remianing supporters.
What Does Ukraine Do? Keep fighting until there is a major change to the political leadership next door.
How & when does this end? Your thoughts plz. Cheers Amigos.