Not a military expert but why are both sides not able to break each other defenses? It seems like whenever both sides go on an offensive, the attackers get btfo. What is the reason for this, lack of air support?
Not a military expert but why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
offensives are just obsolete now, the meta is defense
Hate it when that happens.
Hard to have any element of surprise for offensive action with ever-present drones.
why post the photoshopped version?
because its funny
>why post the photoshopped version?
Only the Ukrainians consistently fail on the defense. Even so, the RuAF advances only with great difficulty. Both sides are weak but Russia less so. Two major factors contribute to Russia’s successes: greatly superior weight of fire support and the use of disposable troops (separatists and Wagner convicts). Disposable troops continually probe and pressure defensive positions which are heavily bombarded by mass artillery. Ukrainians don’t have complex doctrinal competency required to mitigate these factors.
In the defense we see Russians are greatly superior with deep, well-prepared lines and the Ukrainians once again lack the competency to efficiently breach them.
Good Moaning Brown man how are you very fine today? By Vishnu is it not also the language English somewhat difficult.
You know what? Frick you. You always try to insert your stormlard bullshit into these debates as a defense mechanism. You know fully well these are obese atrocities from bumfrick Alabama shilling for the vatniks and you still have to pull your white victim shit.
>You know fully well these are obese atrocities from bumfrick Alabama shilling for the vatniks
Substantiate your claims.
>Only the Ukrainians consistently fail on the defense
3/10 bait
Don't panic, you are in an alternate universe where everything Russia boasted about is a lie and made a massive fool of themselves, an agent will be along shortly to see you home.
You are right and and NCD gays can't refute any of your points, instead they are seething.
Lmao dude go start a gore thread, it’ll do about as much good
Thanks for proving my point, I guess
>and and NCD gays
Good morning sar
>both sides are weak but Russia less so. Two major factors contribute to Russia’s successes: greatly superior weight of fire support and the use of disposable troop
Brown post, but the point about fire support is actually correct. The point about disposable troops is not. Who the hell resurrected Pierre Sprey?
Well because teh Russians are destoying their military equipment bit by bit 50-100 weapons like tanks, apcs and heavy artillery guns a day and another 50-100 kills on other stuff like aircraft, mlrs, anti aircraft, lorries, tankers, engineering vehicles,command vechicles etc etc. The Russians don't want to destroy their while military at once as that would disrupt their plan which is well understood and everything will be understood in a few years. Only by being a comic book villain like saddam or the Taliban or hitler or mussolini etc can you get the Americans to spend a fortune rebuilding your nation. Look at west Germany...look at Italy...look at Japan....all rebuilt, great legal and democratic systems everything nice. Well Russia just wants some of that action. So they send all their equipment to be destroyed along with the biggest morons in Russia and hell them to do rapes and murders in Ukraine so bad everyone will go 'Russia is evil'. Putin is 70 and only spends most of his day twitching and farting anyway so I mean frick it. The old military from the soviet era with all its corruption is being killed off and the FSB discredited and soon Russia will have no tanks or artillery or young men. If Russia has too much destroyed in one day someone may notice what is going on and it will frick everything up. Then the Americans can come in and hang Putin and spend a fortune rebuilding Russia and giving it sewers and bridges and roads, airports, ports, hospitals, universities and new legal system and maybe a car industry like Germany or Japan, who knows?
Offense is difficult. Conventional wisdom says that all else being equal you need a straight 3-1 numbers advantage minimum to displace a dug-in opponent. You can move that number with factors like morale, training, technological advantage, air superiority, et cetera, but unless you have dramatic overmatch offense is going to be a grind.
3-1 ratio only applies if the forces are of equal quality and effectiveness. That's not the case here. For example you don't need 900 SAS to overwhelm 300 toddlers in swimsuits.
Read my post again, genius.
Ukraine has fixed and pinned Russia in static defences, including assets like artillery and tanks and apcs while Ukraine has longer range and more accurate artillery with up to a 200KM range while there is an 80KM corridor between the front and mariupol. Yet Russians think everything is find because anyone with an IQ over warm water left Russia 2014-2022.
I do not understand why you responded to me with that information.
Also how do you fix static defenses? They are by definition fixed.
Modern offensives are fought with air power. Niether side has a significant enough air presence to conduct a successful offensive and it turns it into a slugging match
The fricking desperation from vatBlack person shill posters
1)The US Republican party will save Putin
2)/misc/ will save putin
3)The EU will save Putin
4)Surely Ukraine will stop attacking because we dug some muddy dutches and laid some mines
5)Surely the EU will force Ukraine into a frozen conflict like in 2014 because Russia really wants that
None of these things are happening. What is happening is Russian disarmament and demographic destruction. Every day. 1.3 million of Russia most educated and skilled have fled Russia. 220,000 Russian men are dead. 600,000 are missing a limb or are blind, deaf or in a wheelchair and will require care for the rest of their miserable impoverished lives. How you doing there Russia? You ok? Your entire invasion army of 190,000 men is dead. Of the 280,000 in the Russian ground forces pre war 220,000 are dead. The entire fleet of main battle tanks in teh Russia armed forces pre invasion is destroyed. Including all of the most modern ones and professional contract crews, two thirds of the Russian heavy artillery that was in the Russian military pre war has been destroyed, half of the APCS, one third of the helicopters. A Russian flagship has been sunk. NATO has been expanded by one Finland and one Sweden. Russia has united NATO and the EU, USA and the G7 in such a way as has never been seen before and triggered them rearming massively. Even Poland has a more powerful military than Russia now. Russia has become a diplomatic pariah, the Russian economy is fricked onky sustaining itself by teh Russian state seizing money from Russian company bank accounts, western companies have left Russia, inaward investment has ceased, Russia has stopped even publishing economic information, the EU has stopped using Russia as and oil and gas supplier and never will again. Russia is now the most sanctioned nation in history. Only 4 nations in the UN supported Russia in its invasion of Ukraine and they were tin pot dictatorships. Ass is in the ass.
seething
yes, I am seething. I'm going to ruin a Russians life today (a family actually). I'm really looking forward to it. I'm making them homeless. I bought a bundle of mortgages just so I could sort through it and identify Russians and destroy their lives by ratcheting them financially until I break them . I'm having great fun. Are you?
>.t butthurt belter
The "butthurt belt" has superior standards of living compared to Russia, which is hilarious
It's only butthurt because they left state constant assrape what is existence in russia in nutshell
Man homie your seething hard
Maybe overlooked factor is that many/most of the trained regulars are out of the fight by now. It's barely trained mobiks fighting other barely trained mobiks.
>Not a military expert but why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
I mean the Kherson offensive lasted 2 months, aren't you jumping the gun on this a bit? Offensives can be very long, not everything is an instant rout.
>Kherson offensive
Russia retreated in order, Ukraine let them slip across the river.
Yeah that is how Ukraine took back the biggest city Russia had taken. If the rail lines from Russia get cut, Russia will be retreating in order again, on a much bigger scale.
Seems that the absence of air superiority, artillery has advanced both in volume and accuracy to make break throughs too difficult.
They've regressed to WW1 style warfare made up of predominantly infantry in trenches supported by heavy artillery. That makes offensives difficult and costly.
>but why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
ukrainians are taking ground every fricking day both in the south and the east. even your vatBlack person telegram garbage admits it.
>only 30 villages and 1000 bradleys left to tokmak
>crimea soon (15 years give or take)
>1000 Bradleys
Less than a dozen full losses so far. Try again, pajeet.
Europe simply doesn't have the.population to launch large offensives. Russia can't afford to mobilize actual workers without fricking what's left of its economy and Ukraine is past the point of ever being a functioning state again. The best they can hope for is a trickle of foreign fighters from equally tired European countries.
why are you posting a zoomed in cropped pic of the original nafo chud
its looking grim out there
This war will go on for years
I guess two is technically years.
Looks like the new meta is mines. Everything is mined, they have to stop to clear the mine field, and then they get hit by arty. That would mean all the feel-good moralizing countries who signed treaties saying they'll never use mines are royally fricked.
>lack of air support
Maybe more could be achieved by more air presence, but if Russia cannot push with their current air force against Ukraine, that means no other country will can do it either except the US.
it was always the meta. using artillery to lay mines behind the enemy is somewhat recent tech tho
The meta on top of that is that mining everything cuts both ways. There was a recent Russian counterattack that had to fall back, and a bunch of their armor hit their own minefields in the chaos.
found him
>why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
MINES
SAMs
SEAD & FEED stalemate. Then there's nuSSR being incapable of logistically sustaining it's on paper man meat advantage at current levels, much less the kind of mongol hordes expected from them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB8wikbUX1A
offensives succeed either by:
1 - complete air AND land superiority (just air superiority isn't going to cut it)
2 - surprising your enemy in either timing or placement of the attack (think tet offensive)
right now intel is so good it's impossible to move troops without the other side noticing, unless you are completely moronic (start of war for russians and kharkov offensive of ukr was just that).
now it's literally impossible to make a large breakthrough, what is possible is slow grinding to the complete depletion of resources (human, technical or morale).
it's like boxing amateur championship matches which mostly end in point victory and not in a knockout.
tet was a gargantuan failure militarily though, it only accidentally managed to influence domestic politics in the us
>why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
Wrong
>Muh Bahkmut
An unremarkable city, only made notable by the way that the Russians couldn't commit suicide as fast as they were lining up to kill themselves attacking it. While it potentially could have served as a logistical crossroads to enable follow on Russian offensives in Donetsk, the last vestiges of Russian forces capable of meaningful offensives ran themselves raw taking a tiny ass city.
>Honk
Whoa, it's almost like the city was only important if Russia could mount offensives elsewhere, which they can't.
Why is Ukraine trying to take it back if it has no value?
IMO it doesn't make sense on their part either. They should just let Russia try and advance outside cities again and watch them get clapped the moment they outrun their artillery
Because the Russians have placed a disproportionate number of units into it, since their one propaganda victory over the past year absolutely cannot be recaptured without loss of face. Flanking the city would guarantee the cauldron that Wagner only dreamed of, plus give an enormous poke in the eye for every vatnik who claimed it was the defining military victory of the 21st century.
It's also a relatively small number of Ukrainian units attacking it. An opportunity to just kill more Russians and potentially bait the Russian reserves into holding those ruins.
Because Russians are a blight. There is evil in the world and it must be purged.
Hailing Bakhmut as some sort of great propaganda coup is extra moronic
It cost the Russians a ton of men and materiel plus they now have a completely flattened city on their hands and couldn't advance beyond it
MiG monument pics doko?
neither side can gain air superiority and bomb the shit out of defences with impunity. Add in modern intelligence gathering, and it turns into a fricking slogfest. It doesnt help that both sides are lacking serious armor. Russians are resorting to 60 year old tanks while ukraine barely has anything modern. So everything has devolved into these meatwave tactics and trenchwarfare like something out of WW1.
>why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
Ukraine is breaking Russian defenses
also
Neither side is capable of performing SEAD, so they cannot perform effective combined arms operations. Additionally russia's air force is horrifically undertrained and equipped for the mission they've been given.
Complex air operations are something that a force has to train extensively for, which is why the US does so many Red Flag exercises each year for itself and it's allies.
>why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
The entire country is nothing but flat open fields bordered by small rows of trees that barely provide cover. Outside of the cities there is no where to hide from anything. It's like trying to take a country that is entirely no mans land, a suicide mission that you can only win by sacrificing bodies. And then when you actually manage to push past the open fields and take a city which is akin to the d-day beach landings, you find yourself on one side of the fricking dnieper river with the enemy standing on the other shore. The bridges are blown out, the entire river is surrounded by swampland, it's miles across in places and you have to find a way to get across the mud while carrying all your shit with you in a handful of places which are narrow enough.
>why are both sides not able to break each other defenses?
I think it would be more accurate to say "not able to break each other's defenses YET." Assaulting a fortified position without air superiority is one of the toughest tasks on a battlefield, right up there with "successful amphibious landing of ground troops". It's going to be weeks before anybody can make a reasoned assessment of success or failure.
>What is the reason for this, lack of air support?
Pretty much. One reason that conventional wisdom said the RuAF was going to take over the country within weeks was that everybody (including the Kremlin) assumed that the VVS had enormous overmatch and would mog the Ukrainians in SEAD. Turns out that the performance of the USAF is not typical of other airforces.
Both sides have comparative advantages in certain kinds of firepower. It makes crossing open ground difficult.
Russians:
>Weight of fires (more guns)
>Superior air power (I'll offer a quick justification; the VVS is absolute fricking trash compared to a Western air force, but the fact is that have a greater number of technologically superior airframes which they've been able to bring to bear under certain circumstances)
>Large number of long-range munitions (an advantage they tend to squander, but that's besides the point)
Ukrainians:
>Higher precision weapons
>Better targeting/intel practices
>Highly effective long-range munitions (though a quantifiably small number)
After the dust settled from Russia's incredibly chaotic (though reasonably successful) surprise pushes in February/March of 2022, Russian offensives basically boiled down to bombarding to wear down Ukrainian defenses. The introduction of disposable troops became a factor as attrition started to wear the Russians down.
The last two Ukrainian offensives in Kherson and Kharkiv, where the Russians got BTFO'd quickly, were somewhat of a fluke. Russians got very arrogant and simultaneously:
1) Moved large clusters of elite troops to a front where they could be cut off from supplies (Kherson)
2) Left the Northern fronts lightly defended because they assumed the Ukrainians were weak/dumb (Kharkiv)
The current Ukrainian offensive doesn't have the same good fortune going for it. The Russians can't be as easily cut off as they were in Kherson, nor are they as complacent. It's going to be a slog, no matter what.
Ukraine also doesn't have enough low-level AA to keep the choppers away
Defense is easier. Also, both sides are poor post-soviet shitholes (albeit one strives not to be one and the other is willing to destroy itself to keep everyone around it shit, too)