Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Ukraine’s “Counter-Offensive” Major Belly Flop

A.

When the invasion first began, I figured that the Dnieper would be the new border, with the eastern half annexed to Russia and a Russian-satellite state controlling the western half of Ukraine. That was based on my analysis of the initial Russian assault and how it compared with the Russian reconquest of the Ukraine in 1943. I thought Russia would be able to "boom, headshot" Ukraine. Russia's logistical, operational, and tactical incompetence put an end to that. The idea that the Russians would be road bound frankly never crossed my mind. I figured they would be able to swoop down in overwhelming force along the MSRs, but not be limited to the MSRs. And that they would achieve their objectives before the spring thaw set in, at which point no one would really be able to respond while they entrenched. And by the time the West got around to doing something, it would be a fait accompli. Needless to say, that didn't happen. Russian tanks stranded on the roads out of gas, troops unable to maneuver off the roads. It was like the Russians in Afghanistan all over again (I highly recommend reading The Bear Went Over the Mountain by Lester Grau). The fact that Russia failed so spectacularly tells me that his government and senior leaders within his military are probably full of the same moronic and spineless yes men that our government and military coddle so well. I know from personal experience that it is dangerous to speak truth to power in the U.S. military. My observations of the Russian military suggest that it is likely much the same over there (just different politics).

At this point, it is a stalemate as long as the West keeps supporting Ukraine. There's no way Ukraine takes back all the lost areas. There's no way - short of the West pulling the rug out from under Ukraine as we did in Afghanistan or Vietnam - that Russia takes much more of the country. Best case scenario for Ukraine is an outcome like the Korean War, with a demarcation line that effectively becomes the new Iron Curtain.

That assessment is based on a career in the military, not based on "what I think the United States should or should not do" in this situation.

The “smart bombs” the U.S. used in the First Gulf War were almost all “dumb” bombs from the Vietnam War fitted out with guidance kits. So, if Russia finally figured that out 30 years later, good on them. When the Russians intervened in Syria, they brought a small amount of their best stuff, but most of the ordnance was “dumb.” It still did the job, but the shortcomings of their own military-industrial complex has been one of Russia’s major challenges in the current war. It’s one of their major logistical headaches that has hampered them far more than anything else.

lol. One thing Russia does very well now is to adapt in combat and they aren't hindered by the old soviet bureaucracy

russia is producing the most sophisticated drones now and producing 155 mm rounds at ten times the rate of the US

Russia glide bombs have a range of 60 km now. A lot more than US glide bombs and are much more accurate

Tell us about US hyper sonic missile systems now lol


Half of the American f 35's remain grounded due to technical problems and software issues

Gheyghost ur full of schit

'
The Russians suck at most things except corruption.
They wrote the book on corruption.
When they were "15" they had a lot more cannon fodder than they have now.

If the Russians are so technologically advanced and almighty, why haven’t they been able to beat a coalition lead by a senile old toad like FJB and Zelensky?

Western war movie watchers think that you have to "take the hill" or, IOW, conquer territory to achieve victory.

Russian strategy has been one of active defense all along. Kill the enemy, destroy his military and his capability to continue. Taking ground, in and of itself, is useless if enemy forces are still intact and capable of serious operations. The Russian's have advanced, and they have advanced, only for the purpose of destroying the enemy, not to occupy territory just for the sake of it.

The Russians, contrary to Western propaganda, have been very careful to avoid unnecessary casualties, mainly for their own forces but also in regards to the civilian population. An example of this restraint is their avoidance of destroying Ukraine's energy facilities in the cold Winter when it would be hardest on the civilians.

Their use of stand off weapons; rockets, missile, drones, etc, have also been mostly surgical. If they wanted to, they could turn Ukraine into a parking lot.

As to the title of this thread "Major Belly Flop" this has been evident months ago and no longer remotely in question. Some anticipate a major Russian offensive coming soon. This may well be but the Russians are achieving one of the main goals of their SMO, that is, to destroy the Ukrainian military using their strategy of active defense. Then the rest will be a cake walk. So why attack which will lead to more Russian casualties than necessary?

MAGA!

If the Russians are so technologically advanced and almighty, why haven’t they been able to beat a coalition lead by a senile old toad like FJB and Zelensky?

Kyrylo Budanov, Ukrainian military leader who has served as the chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine since August 2020, gets an inoculation from Dr. Kinzhal.

RIpieces.