Yes, seven months of sending Ukrainian soldiers to die under Russian artillery, air, and missile bombardment. Ukraine (and NATO) are fighting a war for territory. Russia is simply fighting to destroy the Ukrainian army and its NATO weaponry. Under such conditions, why move at all as long the enemy keeps feeding you troops and weaponry…
Yes, seven months of sending Ukrainian soldiers to die under Russian artillery, air, and missile bombardment. Ukraine (and NATO) are fighting a war for territory. Russia is simply fighting to destroy the Ukrainian army and its NATO weaponry. Under such conditions, why move at all as long the enemy keeps feeding you troops and weaponry to destroy? Again, there is a huge difference between a war of attrition and a war for territory, and until you are able to wrap your head around that it seems futile to discuss.
You are concerned because Russia has seemingly made little territorial gains, so it looks like they are just barely holding the line, not making progress against the Ukrainians. If they were fighting a war for territory, you would be absolutely correct, but they are not, and consequently, they are in no rush to to take territory. Meanwhile, they are pushing Ukraine to the point of total collapse as a fighting unit and causing NATO to use all its available weaponry and ammo in the process. All this with comparatively minimal casualties on the Russian side.
Sorry but your analysis doesn t hold water. If the ukranians had carastrophic cassulaties it would had show on the battlefield. The fact is besides Bahmut the russians still can t progress on other fronts as well. Avdiika is a case în point. The Harkov region another. There the russian tried to break trough made little progress then they were stuck. În Kremanaia they have progresed 10km but then....nothing. So they want to progress, not just attrition war but they can t. The same în Ugledar. They wanted to take the town but they were stopped. Simple as that. Plus an attrition war goes both ways. It s not like the ukranians can t fight back with altelery, Himars way back into the rear. It s not like Wagner isin t taking loads of cassulaties. It s not like the russians don t have a boat load of dead soldiers în Ugledar. You can t win a war with a strategy of attrition. You need manuever warfare to cut the enemy and take them în a caouldrom like the soviets did at Stalingrad with the german sixth army. Think for yourself.
Yes, seven months of sending Ukrainian soldiers to die under Russian artillery, air, and missile bombardment. Ukraine (and NATO) are fighting a war for territory. Russia is simply fighting to destroy the Ukrainian army and its NATO weaponry. Under such conditions, why move at all as long the enemy keeps feeding you troops and weaponry to destroy? Again, there is a huge difference between a war of attrition and a war for territory, and until you are able to wrap your head around that it seems futile to discuss.
You are concerned because Russia has seemingly made little territorial gains, so it looks like they are just barely holding the line, not making progress against the Ukrainians. If they were fighting a war for territory, you would be absolutely correct, but they are not, and consequently, they are in no rush to to take territory. Meanwhile, they are pushing Ukraine to the point of total collapse as a fighting unit and causing NATO to use all its available weaponry and ammo in the process. All this with comparatively minimal casualties on the Russian side.
Sorry but your analysis doesn t hold water. If the ukranians had carastrophic cassulaties it would had show on the battlefield. The fact is besides Bahmut the russians still can t progress on other fronts as well. Avdiika is a case în point. The Harkov region another. There the russian tried to break trough made little progress then they were stuck. În Kremanaia they have progresed 10km but then....nothing. So they want to progress, not just attrition war but they can t. The same în Ugledar. They wanted to take the town but they were stopped. Simple as that. Plus an attrition war goes both ways. It s not like the ukranians can t fight back with altelery, Himars way back into the rear. It s not like Wagner isin t taking loads of cassulaties. It s not like the russians don t have a boat load of dead soldiers în Ugledar. You can t win a war with a strategy of attrition. You need manuever warfare to cut the enemy and take them în a caouldrom like the soviets did at Stalingrad with the german sixth army. Think for yourself.
Lon is a troll, please don't feed (engage) the troll.