Theres no way to explain that shit in a short digestible manner especially on PrepHole and considering the fog of war you will have to wait until the end of this war to accurately figure out how both sides fought
Still too much fog of war
At most we have only like a few videos and some telegramm channels info to go off how they went
Unless you want some basic bitch analysis like the kherson bridge being hit by himars to constrain russian logistics
Mix of Nato/Soviet style with higher adaptability and tech savvyness compared to both of structures due to smaller amount of resources available and uneven training.
Improvisation and intergenerational-institutional turnover chucking out Soviet era dogshit while incorporating USSR era servicemen's experience to good effect (like pensioner tankers that know their machines doing more or less static infantry direct fire support).
This. When the invasion started Ukraine was half way through transforming itself into a NATO style military.
A lot of what you see on the ground is a mix between those two spheres. At the small scale mission command, an empowered NCO corp and actually training their soldiers is paying dividends. At the operational or strategic scale there is still a lot of Soviet influence.
When you get down to it though the Ukrainian way of war appears to be having no loyalty to any form of doctrine and doing what is most effective at killing Russians with what you have.
Ironically the half-Soviet nature of the Ukrainian military probably drives the Russians batshit-insane, since they were trained specifically to fight "MUH EVIL WEST".
Russians never trained to fight a fucking former USSR member that knows them intimately.
Ukrainian zeal to defend people and homeland is even more fanatical than Russian fixation on "muh winning". Russia cosplays as the USSR, but Ukraine is if the USSR actually survived to the modern age and evolved.
>but Ukraine is if the USSR actually survived to the modern age and evolved
Finally someone I can fully agree with. Kinda. 90s an oligarchs still left their mark
>Kyiv’s improvised web of drones, fighters and weapons, linked through satellite communications and custom software, is giving its soldiers a level of intelligence, coordination and accuracy that has allowed the initially outnumbered and outgunned forces to run circles around Russia’s massive but lumbering armies.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-has-digitized-its-fighting-forces-on-a-shoestring-11672741405
It’s by having an older Officer class trained in the way your enemy fights as part of their former Empire’s military and having a younger officer class trained in the style of those who were preparing to fight that empire’s army for 50 years.
Surprisingly good when you know how your enemy approaches warfare and can adapt outside tactics to counter it.
Mix of Nato/Soviet style with higher adaptability and tech savvyness compared to both of structures due to smaller amount of resources available and uneven training.
Improvisation and intergenerational-institutional turnover chucking out Soviet era dogshit while incorporating USSR era servicemen's experience to good effect (like pensioner tankers that know their machines doing more or less static infantry direct fire support).
Kill Russians and destroy their stuff whenever possible. This sounds obvious, but in a lot of militaries you sit around doing fuck all until command decides it's time to blow shit up. The U.S. particularly likes these massive body blows, which makes sense given it's resources, but the Ukranians have gone with a death by a thousand cuts approach.
This. Bakhmut is just both sides thinking that a meat grinder will wear the other down first. Ukraine knows that they can recapture as much territory as they want, but Russians will just come back with more mobiks. So the name of the game is to destroy as much materiel as possible before making an attempt at capturing an objective to leverage Russia's near nonexistant capacity for rapid reorganization.
I dont think the ukies see it as a meatgrinder, all the evidence indicates that ukraine hasnt lost particularly large amounts of men in bakhmut. Their thinking is probably that bakhmut is as good a location to defend as any, and if the russians are attacking there, then they arent attacking anywhere else.
So other than russian brainrot, ukraine shows the validity of western command structure and tsctical thinking.
Officers on the ground have a lot of independence and flexibility to act on their own and innovation is encouraged. This means you can easily gain the upper hand over rigid and predictable soviet doctrine, even at a huge material disadvantage.
I dont remember the source of this quote, but a wermacht officer once said 'whatever you think the least likley way the americans will attack you is, that is the way the americans will attack you'
NATO intel and ISTAR capabilities still show massive strengths when being used with Soviet gear, plus a bit of stealing ISIS's homework for the idea integrating civilian drones into the military apparatus though they heavily refined it.
The greatest asset in war is to be less retarded than your opponent.
Indeed. And the Russians have demonstrated incredible stupidity and incompetence, as well as serious infighting.
Napoleon made a reputation as a serious contender for the best commander in history basically just because of this
this
Theres no way to explain that shit in a short digestible manner especially on PrepHole and considering the fog of war you will have to wait until the end of this war to accurately figure out how both sides fought
How about an analysis of a single battle then?
Still too much fog of war
At most we have only like a few videos and some telegramm channels info to go off how they went
Unless you want some basic bitch analysis like the kherson bridge being hit by himars to constrain russian logistics
This. When the invasion started Ukraine was half way through transforming itself into a NATO style military.
A lot of what you see on the ground is a mix between those two spheres. At the small scale mission command, an empowered NCO corp and actually training their soldiers is paying dividends. At the operational or strategic scale there is still a lot of Soviet influence.
When you get down to it though the Ukrainian way of war appears to be having no loyalty to any form of doctrine and doing what is most effective at killing Russians with what you have.
Ironically the half-Soviet nature of the Ukrainian military probably drives the Russians batshit-insane, since they were trained specifically to fight "MUH EVIL WEST".
Russians never trained to fight a fucking former USSR member that knows them intimately.
Ukrainian zeal to defend people and homeland is even more fanatical than Russian fixation on "muh winning". Russia cosplays as the USSR, but Ukraine is if the USSR actually survived to the modern age and evolved.
>but Ukraine is if the USSR actually survived to the modern age and evolved
Finally someone I can fully agree with. Kinda. 90s an oligarchs still left their mark
What do you want to know?
Quick and dirty analysis would be that USA took the theoretical late Soviet doctrines and modernized them based on their own expertise.
That does seem to be true. Ukraine is Super Saiyan Soviet.
>Kyiv’s improvised web of drones, fighters and weapons, linked through satellite communications and custom software, is giving its soldiers a level of intelligence, coordination and accuracy that has allowed the initially outnumbered and outgunned forces to run circles around Russia’s massive but lumbering armies.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-has-digitized-its-fighting-forces-on-a-shoestring-11672741405
>We take anything that can pew or boom and throw it at russians
It’s by having an older Officer class trained in the way your enemy fights as part of their former Empire’s military and having a younger officer class trained in the style of those who were preparing to fight that empire’s army for 50 years.
Surprisingly good when you know how your enemy approaches warfare and can adapt outside tactics to counter it.
Mix of Nato/Soviet style with higher adaptability and tech savvyness compared to both of structures due to smaller amount of resources available and uneven training.
Improvisation and intergenerational-institutional turnover chucking out Soviet era dogshit while incorporating USSR era servicemen's experience to good effect (like pensioner tankers that know their machines doing more or less static infantry direct fire support).
>give a shit about winning
>don't act dumb
that's pretty much it
Kill Russians and destroy their stuff whenever possible. This sounds obvious, but in a lot of militaries you sit around doing fuck all until command decides it's time to blow shit up. The U.S. particularly likes these massive body blows, which makes sense given it's resources, but the Ukranians have gone with a death by a thousand cuts approach.
Ukraine excels at that, progressively beating down the Russian juggernaut.
We should employ something similar against China.
This. Bakhmut is just both sides thinking that a meat grinder will wear the other down first. Ukraine knows that they can recapture as much territory as they want, but Russians will just come back with more mobiks. So the name of the game is to destroy as much materiel as possible before making an attempt at capturing an objective to leverage Russia's near nonexistant capacity for rapid reorganization.
I dont think the ukies see it as a meatgrinder, all the evidence indicates that ukraine hasnt lost particularly large amounts of men in bakhmut. Their thinking is probably that bakhmut is as good a location to defend as any, and if the russians are attacking there, then they arent attacking anywhere else.
Titties
Do not interrupt your enemy while he is Russian
didn't he die?
So other than russian brainrot, ukraine shows the validity of western command structure and tsctical thinking.
Officers on the ground have a lot of independence and flexibility to act on their own and innovation is encouraged. This means you can easily gain the upper hand over rigid and predictable soviet doctrine, even at a huge material disadvantage.
I dont remember the source of this quote, but a wermacht officer once said 'whatever you think the least likley way the americans will attack you is, that is the way the americans will attack you'
NATO intel and ISTAR capabilities still show massive strengths when being used with Soviet gear, plus a bit of stealing ISIS's homework for the idea integrating civilian drones into the military apparatus though they heavily refined it.
>How would you explain the Ukrainian style of weapons use in modern war?
Not making any gains in like 6 months?