- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Russian forces are working to restore maneuver to the battlefield through Soviet deep battle theory but are struggling with implementing the strategy due to current Ukrainian capabilities, the Institute for the Study of War reported in its daily assessment on Feb. 13.
You must log in or register to comment.
I think the only ‘deep combat theory’ they are succeeding in, is having their ships sunk.
Oh, that’s deep!
ISW assesses that the Russian military could break Ukrainian defensive lines if it could effectively plan and carry out deep battle campaigns. Additionally, Ukrainian forces could also successfully implement these campaigns if Western supporters properly resourced them.
And the bold part is why I’ve been so consistently pissed off and underwhelmed at the response the west has had to the war. Like, if we had decided within the first 6-9 months that we’d give Ukraine everything they need instead of trying to “right size” the aid and micromanaging how they used it with often outdated strategic thinking, the war might be over by now, and we wouldn’t have the problem of Republican quislings trying to kill the viability of the Ukrainian’s defensive campaign.
This is just my pet theory, but I think the problem is that Russia could not have actually been rapidly defeated. In order for a country to lose a war, they have to stop fighting. They have to surrender. Even had Ukraine retaken all its territory the first year, the Russians would not simply be willing to give up and call it a total loss. They would probably fight on. This would likely result in more Ukrainian attacks into internationally recognized Russian territory, which would further pressure Putin.
Facing that degree of danger, to himself personally as a strongman catastrophically failing to seem strong, he would really only have one option to save face–tactical nuclear weapons to try to re-aquire territory.
So, if preventing the use of nukes is a major goal, then the Russians need to be defeated more slowly, so that by the time the Ukrainians retake their borders, the Russians are more exhausted, with lower war support. This might bring them to the peace table, or they might fall apart. But they’re less likely to use tactical nukes to try to turn the war around and start winning again, in a process that would certainly take years.
Basically, the war was always going to take years, no ways to prevent that. So, it’s a question of what position you want the Russians to be in for the bulk of that whole duration of the war. And from the US perspective, the desired position is “no nukes needed”.
My theory anyway.
Taking territory means that you can start building walls (kind of like the Republicans claim to want on the southern border). There would still be drone strikes on cities to worry about, but all Putin understands is power so taking land back still speaks his language. He will not be exhausted while there is any person (mostly males) who he can trick into fighting. So not his grand kids or friends, but anyone else.
