Thoughts on the Russo-Ukranian War?

[I3BrigPvSk]

One main question about this war and the performance of the Russian forces is; why aren't the Russian trying to target the Ukrainian supplies and strategic targets? The Russian air force has been absent since more or less day one of this war. The Ukrainian air force is still operable. Their logistics is still intact. One reason for it is, the Russians aren't able to target the moving supply lines.

 

[lljadw]

It is not that , because a civilian building,civilian site was attacked,was hit, it was also a target .
About the Russian air force that was absent since day 1 of the war ,its absence was probably intentionally.
In the planning of the attack the intervention of the air force was not considered as needed,as the Kremlin started from the assumption that the war would last only a few weeks (the longer it lasted,the less chance to win the war ) and dangerous,as the intervention of the air force could/would cause a lot of civilian casualties and destruction, while the Russians needed a willing collaboration of the Ukrainians .

 

[lljadw]

Russia has wasted resources on non military targets aka civilian targets and btw, there are several different kinds of drones and missiles. While attacking these targets, they don't attack and reduce the Ukrainian armed forces capability to conduct military operations.

Have the Russians used drones and missiles against the capability of the Ukrainians to conduct military operations ?
The attacks on Kyiv and on the port of Odessa would prove the opposite .

 

[MontyB]

One main question about this war and the performance of the Russian forces is; why aren't the Russian trying to target the Ukrainian supplies and strategic targets? The Russian air force has been absent since more or less day one of this war. The Ukrainian air force is still operable. Their logistics is still intact. One reason for it is, the Russians aren't able to target the moving supply lines.

Chances are that they are trying to target Ukrainian logistics but I can think of two reasons why it doesn't appear so.
1. The Russian military is rather amateurish and doesn't have the specialists and expertise to do it well.
2. We are not hearing about their successes, we hear the Ukrainian side of the story almost exclusively and what we hear from the Russians are usually outlandish and exaggerated claims for example that they have destroyed more Himars systems than have been made and they were destroying Bradleys before they even arrived.

Let's face it when you hear a Russian claim most people roll their eyes and start dividing everything by 10.

This does not mean the Russians havent had some successes, I think it is important that we try and clear the clutter of BS from both sides to try and get a more accurate picture.

 

[lljadw]

One main question about this war and the performance of the Russian forces is; why aren't the Russian trying to target the Ukrainian supplies and strategic targets? The Russian air force has been absent since more or less day one of this war. The Ukrainian air force is still operable. Their logistics is still intact. One reason for it is, the Russians aren't able to target the moving supply lines.

1 Is it so that the Russians are not trying to hit Ukrainian supplies and strategic targets ?
Maybe they do try ,but their air force is to small for a front of 1200 km .
2 Is the Ukrainian air force doing that much better than the Russian one ?
The Ukrainians claim a lot of things, but can their small air force do what they claim ?
3 Both have a small air force that must operate over a front of 1200 km and,when the Ukrainians do better than the Russians ,is that making such a big importance on the outcome of the war ?
Would Russia have won last year if their air force operated'' better'' ?
The present Ukrainian counteroffensive is stalling,is that the responsibility of the Ukrainian air force ?
One should be careful not to exaggerate the importance of the air force in this war .
One can not say that the Russians are not able to target the moving Ukrainian supply lines and OTOH admit that the Ukrainian offensive is stalling .Maybe the Russians are not targeting the moving Ukrainian supply lines,because they are convinced that attacks on these lines/ no attacks on these lines have no positive/no negative results for them .
And, how is it on the Ukrainian side ? Are the Russians resisting successfully because the Ukrainian air force is not doing its job ?Or because the Ukrainian attacks on the Russian supply lines do not benefit Ukraine /do not hurt Russia ?

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

The Russian air force has the tools to do it, but they don't do it. The job for the air force is to prevent the enemy from moving forces, provide with close air support and at the same time preventing the enemy's air force to do the same to your own forces.

The Russian air force has the airplanes to do it so why aren't they hitting the Ukrainian air bases, suppressing the Ukrainian air defenses, attacking Ukrainian logistical hubs/transports of fuel, ammunition. War is logistics and to move these logistics to where they are needed and to do it fast. It gets much harder to do it if the enemy controls the sky.

Ukraine gets intelligence support from the West, which can explain why they are pretty good at hitting Russian HQs, hubs, and logistics. The Russian might have tried it,

The Russians have learned to not use mechanized forces while defending, it is much easier to defend than to attack. They have most likely changed from having one major logistical hub to several smaller ones. They are harder to detect and losing one isn't a major setback.

 

[lljadw]

The Russian air force has the tools to do it, but they don't do it. The job for the air force is to prevent the enemy from moving forces, provide with close air support and at the same time preventing the enemy's air force to do the same to your own forces.

The Russian air force has the airplanes to do it so why aren't they hitting the Ukrainian air bases, suppressing the Ukrainian air defenses, attacking Ukrainian logistical hubs/transports of fuel, ammunition. War is logistics and to move these logistics to where they are needed and to do it fast. It gets much harder to do it if the enemy controls the sky.

Ukraine gets intelligence support from the West, which can explain why they are pretty good at hitting Russian HQs, hubs, and logistics. The Russian might have tried it,

The Russians have learned to not use mechanized forces while defending, it is much easier to defend than to attack. They have most likely changed from having one major logistical hub to several smaller ones. They are harder to detect and losing one isn't a major setback.

This is the outdated WW2 theory that the air force is deciding the outcome of the war .
There is no proof that the Russians have the aircraft to do the job,besides the job of the air force is always changing .
Those who say that Ukraine controls the sky,must explain why this has not resulted in an Ukrainian victory .
If Ukraine is that good that ,with (the western intelligence lobby will say : because ) western intelligence support ,it is very good at hitting Russian HQ,hubs and logistics ( claim for which there is no proof ),why is the war not over ?
After one year of war, Ukraine had only 81 fighters of which no one knows how many are operational .
The frontline is 1200 km and the surface of Ukraine is 600000 square km .
If Ukraine had 810 fighters, its air force could have an important role .

 

[lljadw]

Non complete aircraft losses (source is Wiki ) are
for Ukraine : 100 aircraft
Russia : 80 aircraft
Non combat losses are included
But helicopters and UAV are not included .
I think that these figures are debunking the claims from our media about the importance of the air war and about the superiority of western aircraft,western training and logistics .
Russia nor Ukraine was better in the air and the results of the air war are not decisive .

 

[George]

I think that these figures are debunking the claims from our media about the importance of the air war and about the superiority of western aircraft, western training and logistics.

At this point there's no evidence of western aircraft in use by Ukraine, so no debunk of aircraft or training involving them. The Army, that has been getting western training since sometime after '14, is doing better than back then. so the training and logistics seem to be working.

 

[lljadw]

At this point there's no evidence of western aircraft in use by Ukraine, so no debunk of aircraft or training involving them. The Army, that has been getting western training since sometime after '14, is doing better than back then. so the training and logistics seem to be working.

The Germans are saying that the Ukrainian Army is not doing good ,because it is not following the western advice.
This is not only arrogant, but it also ignores the fact that there is a war going on between 2 armies that did not exist during the Cold War and that thus this strategy is outdated and does not apply .
US has delivered HARMS missiles and JDAM bombs claiming that these would change the outcome of the war .This was wrong .
Now they claim that they will deliver F16 aircraft and train Ukrainian pilots and that these will be ready in 2025 ! and also change the outcome .
The same has been said about the Leos and the US tanks and nothing has happened .
And I doubt that the Ukrainian army is now doing better than in 2014 : the Russians are still in Ukraine .

 

[MontyB]

The Germans are saying that the Ukrainian Army is not doing good ,because it is not following the western advice.
This is not only arrogant, but it also ignores the fact that there is a war going on between 2 armies that did not exist during the Cold War and that thus this strategy is outdated and does not apply .
US has delivered HARMS missiles and JDAM bombs claiming that these would change the outcome of the war .This was wrong .
Now they claim that they will deliver F16 aircraft and train Ukrainian pilots and that these will be ready in 2025 ! and also change the outcome .
The same has been said about the Leos and the US tanks and nothing has happened .
And I doubt that the Ukrainian army is now doing better than in 2014 : the Russians are still in Ukraine .

I think there is some merit in them sticking with what works, I do believe a western force with western equipment and Ukrainian motivation would have kicked the crap out of the Russians by now but Ukraine is stuck in the middle, it is becoming a western nation in terms of equipment and training but it isn't there yet.

As far as Ukraine not doing well, I don't agree I think for a military undergoing manpower, training and equipment transitions without air parity it is doing extremely well.

 

[I3BrigPvSk]

The Ukrainians get the equipment they need to survive, We can be critical toward NATO and other Western countries for being slow.

Will the F-16 planes be a game changer? No, The Ukrainians get most likey AWACS support from NATO, but can the F-16 planes do everything a modern air force does? B fighter support, air to ground attacks, suppressing air defenses, that is usually done with ARM. The Ukrainians were asking for a no-fly zone, but they stopped asking for it when there was no need for one

The Ukrainians got western made vehicles mainly because they were running out of Russian made vehicles. They haven't launched the counter offensive yet, what they are doing is probing attacks. The majority of the Ukrainians best equipped units haven't been committed to battle yet. The Ukrainians have lost vehicles in these attacks and they adjust and change their MO. I begin to think these probing attacks is a deception. The Ukrainians are looking at Crimea, which is much more vulnerable than Donbas.

 

[lljadw]

The Ukrainians get the equipment they need to survive, We can be critical toward NATO and other Western countries for being slow.

Will the F-16 planes be a game changer?

The Ukrainians got western made vehicles mainly because they were running out of Russian made vehicles. They haven't launched the counter offensive yet, what they are doing is probing attacks.

1 There is no proof that Ukraine needs western equipment to survive .
Thus there is no need to be critical toward NATO and other Western countries for being slow .
2 The Lockheed media and politicians are telling us that the F 16 is a game changer ,although every one knows that a few F16 will not decide the outcome of the war .
3 I like to see the proofs that Ukraine got western vehicles mainly because they were running out of Russian made vehicles ,the Russians also were running out of vehicles and their quantitative superiority of vehicles did not help them last year .
4 I like to see the proofs that Ukraine is doing probing attacks .
5 People in the West,especially in DC ,assume that the geography of Ukraine is the same as the geography of West Germany and that the war is a modern version of the war that never happened between the USSR and NATO .
6 NATO NEVER fought against the USSR, thus the German attacks on Ukraine because it does not use NATO strategy and tactics is totally unfounded arrogance :
Ukraine is fighting against Russia, not NATO, thus Ukraine has not to receive lessons from NATO:it is the opposite .
It are not the weapons ( who were never used against the Soviets/the Russians ) that decide the outcome of the war against Russia, but the soldiers and these are Ukrainians, not NATO soldiers .
NATO is treating Ukraine as an inferior,underdeveloped state and country, although Ukraine stopped last year the Russians without serious help from NATO.
The Russians were stopped without F16 ,Leos and Abrams, thus a little , better a very big modesty would serve NATO very well .
The military-industrial complex is trying desperately to convince the world that without its help,the Russians will be at the border with Poland and Romania ,but reality is totally different .

 

[MontyB]

Those are some rather dubious claims that seem extremely short sighted as they dont take into account the west's inability to provide ammunition or parts in sufficient quantities for an indefinite time for old Soviet equipment, it isn't about who's weapons are better it is about what we can provide long term and unless you think Russia will keep them supplied it is the best thing we can do for Ukraine.

It also fails to take into account Ukraine's inability to produce enough of its own weaponry and supplies to keep itself operational.

So while the west's collective response may not be enough for Ukraine to win, it has kept them in the fight and hopefully over the next couple of years it will ramp up to allow Ukraine the ability to bring about peace on its terms.

 

[George]

Everyone wants things done now. There were some commentators who were frustrated at the speed it took the Royal Navy to sail to the Falklands. Not everything is instant gratification.

 

[lljadw]

Those are some rather dubious claims that seem extremely short sighted as they dont take into account the west's inability to provide ammunition or parts in sufficient quantities for an indefinite time for old Soviet equipment, it isn't about who's weapons are better it is about what we can provide long term and unless you think Russia will keep them supplied it is the best thing we can do for Ukraine.

It also fails to take into account Ukraine's inability to produce enough of its own weaponry and supplies to keep itself operational.

So while the west's collective response may not be enough for Ukraine to win, it has kept them in the fight and hopefully over the next couple of years it will ramp up to allow Ukraine the ability to bring about peace on its terms.

1 Proof for Ukraine's inability to produce enough weapons/supplies to keep itself operational ?
2 Proof that the west's collective response has kept Ukraine in the fight ?
3 Ukraine's possibility to remain in the fight does not depend on western help but on the possibility of its opponent to increase the fight .The same happened in the war between Iraq and Iran .
What is the percentage of western weapons and supplies that Ukraine is using,compared to its own weapons and supplies ?
There is no proof that ,without western help, the Russians would today be at the border with Poland and Romania, besides :to be at these borders was never the aim of the Russians .
Ukraine stopped the Russians without western help, without western instructors who would teach them how to fight the Russians .These western instructors never fought against the Russians .
Maybe the western armies could need Ukrainian instructors to teach them how to fight the Russians .

 

[BritinBritain]

Everyone wants things done now. There were some commentators who were frustrated at the speed it took the Royal Navy to sail to the Falklands. Not everything is instant gratification.

Its been said in some quarters that a Nuclear submarine was on station well before the main task force rocked up.

I'm not convinced the Argentine invasion was such a surprise as Thatcher made out. Remember she was at her lowest in public opinion, as soon as the war was won she called a general years, early then romped home with a massive majority. She used men's lives to enhance her political career

 

[MontyB]

Its been said in some quarters that a Nuclear submarine was on station well before the main task force rocked up.

I'm not convinced the Argentine invasion was such a surprise as Thatcher made out. Remember she was at her lowest in public opinion, as soon as the war was won she called a general years, early then romped home with a massive majority. She used men's lives to enhance her political career

I found an MoD release on Reddit confirming that Russia has changed its recruitment ages to include 70 year old senior officers...

 

[George]

Remember she was at her lowest in public opinion, She used men's lives to enhance her political career

Same has been said about Galtieri...

 

[lljadw]

I found an MoD release on Reddit confirming that Russia has changed its recruitment ages to include 70 year old senior officers...

And how many senior officers of 70 will be recalled up,and how many of them will go to Ukraine ?
10,20,40 ?
Or 100 ?
An increase of the manpower of the army (most of this increase will not go to Ukraine ) needs an increase of ''senior '' officers (colonels, generals ).
In September 1939 Germany also recalled up retired generals ..