Russia will have to count toes for troops

[syke6]

We don’t know exactly how the war is going for either side, but we can make some estimates. Open sources have documented Russian and Ukrainian losses. While Russia started off with a whopping equipment advantage, they have documented losses of more equipment than most armies even own. Interestingly, Russia recently started modernizing 800 T-62 tanks. The T-62 was retired in the 1970s. Even with upgraded optics and explosive reactive armor, it belongs in museums. That indicates the Russians are either running out of tanks, or are anticipating running out of tanks. This can’t be good.

The newly conscripted soldiers are already arriving on the battlefield. But they haven’t been training for months, more like a couple of days.

A half-dozen Russian soldiers talk about being shipped to an area of intense fighting in eastern Ukraine just 11 days after their mobilization. Asked about his shooting practice, a bearded conscript says, “Once. Three magazines.”…

…Elsewhere, scores of relatives of freshly drafted Russian soldiers crowd outside a training center, passing items through its fence to the recruits — boots, berets, bulletproof vests, backpacks, sleeping bags, camping mats, medicine, bandages and food.

Russia’s Achilles heel throughout this conflict has been the lack of effective combined arms fighting. Instead, they have relied on their massive artillery advantage–which is steadily being eroded. Hundreds of thousands of poorly trained conscripts won’t fix that problem.

I don’t know what kind of training regular Ukrainian conscripts are getting, but thousands are being trained in the UK and other NATO countries, and outfitted with modern equipment. That’s surely better than what the Russians are getting.

The key here is the Ukraine is being resupplied by the West (in a lumpy manner, to be sure). Ukrainian air defenses are getting stronger, artillery is getting better, foreign infantry fighting vehicles (but not tanks) are being deployed in increasing numbers. At the same time, Russia is digging deeper into their inventory of Soviet-era junk.

I don’t know how this will play out in the next few months, but I don’t see any hope of the Russians holding onto their existing gains, much less being able to conduct an offensive.

[ptheland]

It’s also important to consider motivation - both of the soldiers and the general populace.

The first piece on 60 Minutes yesterday was a heart-breaking look a the civilians in Ukraine killed by the Russian army. Events like that tend to harden the survivors, making them more willing to fight and more accepting of the personal difficulties of supporting their country in war.

And we should not forget the lesson of wars in places like Vietnam and Afghanistan and perhaps London (early WWII). People fighting for their own country and land are far more resilient and creative and tenacious than those on the invading side. Invaders will eventually tire of trying to beat the invaded into submission. The invaded will keep fighting to the very end.

If Ukraine can avoid straight up retaliation on civilians in Russian territory and limit their attacks to proper military objectives - with limited civilian casualties - they may be able to win on the psychological front. And that could give them some advantage to offset the likely numerical advantage on the Russian side.

–Peter

[steve203]

What I keep thinking of, while watching “news” coverage of drone attacks on Ukrainian civilian areas, are the V-1 strikes.

For the record, mass production of V-1s did not start until spring 44, when the noose was starting to close on the Nazis. The first launches were a few days after the Normandy landing.

Appears that, like the Nazis, Putin has resorted to terrorism to offset battlefield losses.

Steve

[Goofyhoofy]

@steve203

start until spring 44, when the noose was starting to close on the Nazis. The first launches were a few days after the Normandy landing.
Appears that, like the Nazis, Putin has resorted to terrorism to offset battlefield losses

We have many examples of how terrorism is counterproductive. Hitler’s indiscriminate bombing on London only made them more cohesive and more willing to fight against him. The 9/11 attacks brought America together in a way that hasn’t been replicated since December 7, 1941. The occasional bombing of military recruiters by extremists during the Vietnam war only set the population against the anti-war advocates.

We used aerial bombing “correctly” in the Gulf War, to take out important strategic targets with minimal collateral damage: communication centers, military HQs, etc.

It’s possible, I suppose that with enough terror bombing the populace might finally say “OK, we’ve had it”, but that hardly argues for a peaceful resolution to things, and I can see internal guerilla campaigns against “occupiers” going on for years, if not decades.

I have a Ukrainian flag in front of my house (and donations to various groups); I hope that we have the political will to continue to support them. Putin will never be satisfied with “just enough”. We might as well step off an airplane waving a peace of paper and say “Peace in our time”; it would have equivalent value.