• The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.netEnglish
    18·
    3 months ago

    How far into this does it become a tactical/strategic blunder for Russia to sink resources into trying to reinforce/recapture the region? This is an asymmetric war where Russia has the numbers advantage, but they don’t have infinite numbers. I thought when this started Ukraine was trying to make a ploy for “give back our territory, we give back yours” but now Russia is weakening their position in the east to make only losses in the north

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      13·
      3 months ago

      Going to copy a reply I gave elsewhere:

      When Russia invaded Ukraine, it became super obvious that their conscript soldiers are mostly untrained, poorly disciplined, have terrible morale and generally suck as soldiers. Their contract soldiers are much better trained, and they’re mostly volunteers backed with some veterans who imparted at least some skills (Russian units are expected to train the recruits that arrive themselves).

      As a result, Russia deployed their skilled soldiers in the areas of heavier fighting, which is a sensible choice. Attacking is a lot harder than sitting in a trench for a few years, after all. In ye olde days of WW1, these conscripts would have been called fortress troops, not trained to attack, only to defend their fixed position.

      But Russia also didn’t do that. Their border troop conscripts were, as with the original invasion, mostly shit. And if you pour shit into solid concrete fortifications, it’s still going to drip out when you shake it, and that’s exactly what happened. Again. For the third time this war.

      So Russia can either pull their contract “volunteers” from the front to sit on the border, meaning they can’t attack as well, or they can start losing troops and land to these kinds of attacks. Either way, sucks to be them, and Ukraine either gets a softer home front, a big chunk of Russia, or both.

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.netEnglish
      11·
      3 months ago

      On a strategic level it will be hard to not take it back. This makes Putin and Russia look extremely weak. The longer it takes Putin to take back that territory, the weaker he looks. This matters a lot. First of all a number of countries have withhold weapons to Ukraine, due to fear of escalation. If Putin can not do it, then that fear is gone. Even more important is Putin’s support within Russia. If Putin looks weak, then somebody else might have some ideas about getting rid of him. That is a problem. Also public support is very likely taking a massive hit. Even if it does not lead to a revolution, it does bind armed forces needed to oppress the potential opposition. Those men are then unable to fight. Then you have other countries looking at the weakness of Russia and the opportunity that gives them. Belarus army just had to hand over a lot of weapons to Russia and I bet the Russian soldiers in Belarus are not armed very well. So just a imagine a revolution. Especially with a bunch of battle hardened Belorussians, who have thought in and for Ukraine. Georgia is another country looking at this. The current government is loyal to Putin, but they have an election coming up. There is a strong possibility that Georgians kick them out.

      As for the tactical level, Russia has to move quickly as Ukraine is building defenses. It is much easier to take back land in Kursk then further south.