Why is modern warfare so fucking stupid nowadays where are the vast mechanized formations punching deep into enemy lines. Where is my blitzkrieg where is combined arms where are my panzer formations.
Why is modern warfare so fucking stupid nowadays where are the vast mechanized formations punching deep into enemy lines.
because those tactics are outdated and useless now.
I don't want to risk my life if i just can drop missles on them
I continue to await the day where ballistic protection becomes so on-par with ballistic weapons that we regress to melee combat. Armored jump troops with melee weapons and starship trooper shoulder mounted nuke launchers when? Break fortification with the nukes and then close with and destroy the enemy by stabbing and slashing
You've been watching too much dune
He's just excited that the Dune II preview recently dropped...or is a major Sci-fi enthusiast.
>modern dune posting instead of based 2001 dune
>Not the 1984 version
>Ivan and Fyodor slapping each other in the ring with fish
>"guys why is boxing so different now"
underrated post
Ukraine is the closest we have come to a conventional war in quite some time. But if Russia and the US would duke it out, the whole thing would look a lot different
We need to have actual modern armies fighting in order to get that.
Slav to slav combat is hardly a "modern" warfare anon. If you wanna see a combined arms operation that actually works just look at desert storm
It's true that they're retarded but they're modern-ish and they're near peer to each other. Desert storm wasn't anywhere near a near peer conflict
>they’re near peer
Ya that’s the issue lol, neither have the ability to go full blitzkrieg so we get brutal drawn out trench shit.
back in the history books where they fucking belong grandpa
yeah dudebro war is so gay now lmfao xP
Kind of like sports, some people are getting so good that it makes them boring for some
btw I am not saying the Russians or even Ukraine have good soldiers or tactics but the ways they kill eachother in the killing fields with drones and laser guided artillery like its a videogame is the true art and ingenuity
>modern warfare
>Ukraine
>Russia
Because it's pretty much slavshitsandmoronsactual morons that dong the fighting so everything looks like one big blunder.
what do you think they're equipping the Ukrainians for, dipshit?
Because mechansed bliztrieg was effective against footsloging infantry divisions using horse cart as logistics (such footslogers were 90% of WWII military). Fast moving maneuver forces could run circles around such force and thar created pattern of deep battle.
But today no one walks. Everyone have some sort of car and can literally move at x10 speeds comparing to WWII. Even more second tier forces using trucks and pickups move faster than armor formation. That removes advantage of maneuver of armored forces abs those forces trying deep penetration just ask for r their own supply lines cut off.
Neither side can mass enough forces to enable maneuver.
The real answer is: because modern tanks and airplanes are so high-tech that they are absurdly expensive to make and maintain, and therefore no country can afford to field as many as needed for them to have a true impact (except maybe the US).
As such, countries going to war fall back to what’s cheap and can be sent in large numbers : infantry, artillery, shit tanks
The US has enough for a near-peer campaign (i.e. China), but probably not a full-blown long-term and large scale land war, at least not without overwhelming aerial superiority, which tbf it probably would have. Other NATO countries outright dont have enough even for a campaign. The Russians technically did also have the numbers just before the war, at least for taking on ukraine, although of very dubious quality, but theyve lost too many now, there are too many effective NATO AT weapons, and they didnt manage to supply them in the field because their logistics are haphazard at best and they didnt know they were actually going to be invading. Tbqh i think NATO tanks are more cost efficient than old soviet tanks, because of significantly higher crew surviveability and resistance to apfsds and AT weapons. The usual mantra is dont get seen but thats just not avoidable or realistic and tanks are outright going to get hit with missiles, AT weapons and bombs from drones, so tanks may as well be able to take a hit. The russians design is so vulnerable to infantry AT that it ends up being un-economical to actually have it spearhead an assault, the Russians use them as mobile fire support 1-3km behind the lines these days. Plus the retards have managed to make fielding a T-72 more expensive than just building a new T-90 OR t-80, which defeats the point of the T-72.
advancements in the area of guidance engineering killed soul warfare
It takes time to design, research, purchase, build and move armor to where it needs to be. Doubly so for advanced aircraft. It takes time to manufacture a state of the art armored vehicle or tank, these days making compromises on design or giving up certain capabilities and features can narrow the flexibility of vehicles and make them more vulnerable and easier to lose. The development and advancement of loitering munitions, drones and man portable anti tank weapons has made the issue more severe.
Without the ability to achieve air superiority, ground war still takes years to resolve. There is considerable time to set up traps, static defenses, anti vehicle and anti personnel mines, in the time it takes to mobilize forces and buildup resources to conduct offensives. The defined lines of battle ossify and soldiers become slow to dislodge. The longer it takes for your offensive to materialize and execute, the worse the problem gets.
This entire issue with ground war is immediately surmounted upon one side gaining SEAD, DEAD or one side running out of air coverage for their higher altitude anti air defense systems.
From fastest to slowest, the forms of modern warfare which can happen all at the same time or only some at the same time or even one at a time depending on the circumstances:
Nuclear war/ WMD war < Air War < Naval War < Ground War < Guerilla War < Information War
Because much like WW1, advancements have blunted offensive capability.
What you dumb idiots always forget is how important the third aspect of mobile warfare is, the air force.
>der Blitzkrieg als strategischer Überfall definiert, vorgetragen durch den operativen Einsatz der Panzerwaffe und Luftwaffe sowie durch Luftlandetruppen.
Even the German mobile warfare doctrine emphasized on CAS.
The Russians forgot their CAS.
Just look at how much heavy lifting was actually done by the air force during Desert Storm.
If you can't into SEAD, you cannot into maneuver warfare.
SAMs exist gay
>Iraqi GBAD included SAM and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) guns. The missiles included the Soviet SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 and SA-8 and the Franco-German Roland I/II missiles. With a range limitation of about 40km, even SA-2s and SA-3s cannot be considered strategic air defence systems, while the SA-8s and the Rolands were purely tactical SAM systems. The SA-6 was used for the tactical role and to fill gaps in the strategic SAM layout. The 58 SAM batteries notwithstanding, Iraq had no strategic SAM system, and with the available SAM batteries, it was capable of limited and thin air defence cover over its strategic targets.
https://balloonstodrones.com/2022/10/19/looking-back-at-iraqi-air-defences-during-operation-desert-storm/
Combined arms means combined arms, you attack with everything you have in a well coordinated manner.
Something a corrupt authoritarian cleptocracy like Russia cannot accomplish and a poor country with limited equipment like the Ukraine cannot field.
Medium range AA and long range AA from the 60s couldn't stop high altitude bombing? You don't say...
>AA from the 60s couldn't stop planes from the 50s
why not?
Because planes from the 80s updated to the standards of the 90s were running interdictions for them.
But you already knew that.
The Russo-Ukrainian war has an airspace that's locked up tighter than a nuns pussy. Large aircraft were utilized heavily at the beginning and as time went on an AA really got to work, things had to fly on the deck. Okay, now your flying on the deck- well you fucked up because everyone and their grandma has MANPADS which started killing things that were trying to fly missions beneath the umbrella of AA.
So now we're limited to very cautious use of air force assets and CAS and air reconnaissance being conducted by satellites, drones, loitering munitions, kamikaze drones, etc etc. Because in such an environment- miniaturized air frames can operate well and are low cost and easy to risk in these types of operations. Easy to deploy from different locations, etc etc.
It only makes sense that when buildups and mobilizations have to occur, that hastily constructed static defenses, minefields and trenches would be utilized in the meantime.
the invention of TOW-like anti tank weapons completely evaporated the notion of this idea
there is still no countermeasure possible to combat a simple TOW missile flying at your tank
Well it's the proliferation of effective man portable anti tank weapons, especially. The sheer numbers that they can be manufactured and issued, it's not just that they are effective. But it's also that they are made plentiful and quickly and are man portable. Every infantry unit you will run into will have access to them and the ability to use concealment and cover between armored vehicles and infantry is nowhere near equal. You can get hit with an anti tank weapon from any direction at any time. Pretty much nowhere is safe for a tank and every time a tank sees infantry anywhere, any time, they need to call in their own infantry support. How many videos did we see at the beginning of the war of lone Russian tanks getting iced with no infantry support? Mountains of them were popping up. So you can imagine just how much this slows any potential offensives.
>-t. retard right before the 1970s
The countermeasure to SACLOS missiles is artillery and machinegun suppression.
That's cope not counter.
>what is smoke
Just because russia lacks basic competency in warfare doesn't mean something is obsolete
Maybe you shouldn't have placed your bets on Russia winning, anon.
this is the poorest country in europe we are talking about
and the other is a corrupt mafia who are best at torturing and intimidating civilians than fighting
>Why is modern warfare so fucking stupid nowadays where are the vast mechanized formations punching deep into enemy lines. Where is my blitzkrieg where is combined arms where are my panzer formations.
Slavs can't into tactics.
Strategy is manageable for them though.