I find it interesting that there are apparently true believers out there who think the Abram's is an ontologically godlike tank and that it's historical record is not the result of overmatched technology and overwhelming air superiority
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2024
11 points (73.9% liked)
World News
32316 readers
1335 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Ukraine’s lack of experience with such advanced tanks
Love how they do a little victim blaming too
The slavic brainpan etc etc
So advanced, the smartest guys from the US are needed to pilot it. Top men!
Well otherwise they'd have to admit all those doohickeys are overpriced junk
I'm sure that'll turn the military collapse right around.
The Unrainian army is collapsing so bad they accidentally collapsed all the way into Kursk.
What does it say about the Russian army that a collapsing enemy is still occupying large parts of Russia? Or does the Russian army simply not care? Are certain parts of Russia more Russian than orhers?
"Large parts of Russia"? Oh, well...
occupying large parts of Russia
Good one lol
Ok, occupying small parts, if that makes you happier. Maybe so small that Russia does not care about it, nor the citizens living there.
But that can't be the case, because Russia seems to put a lot of effort into cleaeing out e.g. Donbass, yet there Ukraine still is "occupying" large areas of it.
If Russia does not care, then stop fighting there. If Russia does care, then why do they have so much trouble with it, taking years and years to kick out "occupiers". How can Russia tolerate such a situation? Or is it, maybe, the case that Russia can't kick them out, despite the superior military? Which again goes back to my point about how impressivly bad Russia is performing, all things considered.
Last I checked, Russia evacuated the citizens living in these few villages, and now it's become a cauldron for the AFU where they have thousands of troops stuck who can't leave. Was real gift to Russia as even Forbes admits. Ukraine is losing twice as many vehicles in this debacle as they were previously. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/08/17/out-in-the-open-and-on-the-move-in-russias-kursk-oblast-ukrainian-forces-are-vulnerable-and-losing-lots-of-armored-vehicles/
Guess what's gonna happen once this "offensive" burns itself out. Russia is going to do a counter attack and open a new front in Sumy region against the depleted and demoralized AFU.
Last I checked, Russia evacuated the citizens living in these few villages, and now it’s become a cauldron for the AFU where they have thousands of troops stuck who can’t leave.
And why exactly did the Russian military allow this to happen? Considering the state of the Ukrainian military with outdated tech even some mininal protection should have sufficied? If I care about someone, I protect them so that nothing bad happens to them. I bust don't ignore them, then go "oops" and do the very minimal amount of work, which would not even had been necessary had I done my job in the first place.
Seems pretty obvious why the Russian military would want to expand the front creating logistics problems for Ukraine. Creating a large front has literally been the doctrine since WW2 times. Ukraine is now stuck in Kursk because politically they can't just pull back, so now they have to keep feeding valuable resources into a battle that has zero strategic value for Ukraine. Meanwhile, this is weakening actual strategic places like Pokrovsk. Once Russia takes that, it splits the front in half between north and south which will make it impossible for AFU to reinforce its southern forces. This will create a huge cauldron where Ukrainian troops are trapped. Even mainstream western media understands this, yet here you are.
Kursk is in fact one of the major factors accelerating the collapse as even western media admits now. If Ukraine couldn't hold well prepared positions in Donbas, then they obviously have no hope of holding anything in Kursk either. All it did was stretch already thinning units to a new front and create a logistics nightmare for Ukraine. Also, if you think a few villages in Kursk constitutes large parts of Russia then it's clear that you haven't seen a map in your life.
Kusk? Did you already forget about Donetsk, Luhansk, Kharkiv, and other "Russian" regions partially occupied by Ukrainian troops? This just underlines my point that certain areas seem to be more Russian than others, despite being part of the Russian Federation. It seems even Russia forgets they annexed the areas.
You mean places where Russia is actively advancing right now? https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/08/europe/ukraine-military-morale-desertion-intl-cmd/index.html
This just underlines my point that certain areas seem to be more Russian than others, despite being part of the Russian Federation. It seems even Russia forgets they annexed the areas.
The only thing this underlies the fact that you're utterly clueless on the subject you're attempting to debate. Russian military strategy is to defeat the Ukrainian army, this will involve letting go of territory when it makes strategic sense to do so. Even western media openly admits that Kursk incursion isn't going to last long.
I'm pretty sure people in the affected areas would rather not be evacuated and have their lived destroyed, don't you? Is Russia unable to accommodate that? Why?
Because it's a war, and saving lives of thousands of troops can take priority over accommodating people living in a few villages. You should let Russian general staff know of your brilliant military strategies though.
The fact that Ukraine, using antiquated hand-me-downs, still manages to hold off Russia, with access to state-of-the-art technology, is both truly impressive of Ukraine, and truly impressive of Russia (but for different reasons).
meanwhile in the real world https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
War of attrition? Off to the gulag with you, clearly it's a special military operation of attrition!
gulag
modern day Russia
Doesn't understand the difference between a Russian legal term (SMO) and a general military strategy
You seem severely confused. Are you ok?
How can something that legally can not be called a "war" be called "war of attrition"? Does it make sense to use terminology related to wars to something that is not a war? The article specifically talks about "attritional wars". Are you saying an "attritional war" does not need to be a war?
On the one hand, you seem to be very strict with the exact wording (taking offense at the joking use of "gulag") , on the othet hand you seem to play it quite loose when it comes to other terms.