"Western military prowess is at full show here" is pretty accurate, and it supports my point.
Swarm tactics, using the local infantry as suicide runners with minimal-to-no artillery support, charging against a similar number of enemies and, supported by concentrated artillery barrages and air support is a fuck-witted strategy that show absolutely no regard for the lives of the men doing the fighting - it worked in the Middle East, but against a mobile army with the focus that Russia places on artillery, it's done nothing but bleed Ukraine of people. The only other tactic employed by the West appears to be to insist that every inch of terrain is held onto, no matter the cost in Ukrainian lives. Whereas, being far more mobile, connected, and professional, the Russians are able to make considered strategic decisions, occasionally sacrifice tactical wins for the sake of operational success, and to do things like withdraw from areas, either because they're not that strategically significant or because they're luring the Ukrainians into a firetrap - as they appear to have done to the bridgehead Ukraine managed to achieve in their
disastrous Kherson counteroffensive.
The only genuine success we've seen from Ukraine recently, was their offensive into Izium in Kharkiv region, which masterfully took the Russians by surprise and has the potential to genuinely screw with their supply lines.
But:
A) This was against the advice of Western military planners (so, there's your Western military prowess on full display); and,
B) It's a bit early yet to determine if Ukraine made gains the Russians won't reverse when they decide to - which has largely been the theme of this conflict. Chances are, Ukraine, as has become the norm, is sacrificing tomorrow's military capabilities for the sake of today's PR war.
You guys reveal your strategic/tactical ignorance by continuing to say things like "that is enough to stop Russia in its tracks". Russia has little need to rush anything, since they have a tremendous advantage in equipment, having annihilated much of Ukraine's material in the early stages of the conflict and with the West unable to replace what Ukraine's already lost. Since Russia's only real shortage is in terms of manpower, it behooves the Russians to move slowly, hammering Ukrainian positions with artillery until they're softened up enough to risk lives re-taking. The West, on the other hand, is treating the lives of soldiers as though they think they're playing an RTS.
It's also revealing that you think Western tanks will be the game-changer, when Western artillery (in a largely artillery war)
wasn't. Western tanks (specifically, German-made Leopard 2s; amongst the best tanks the West has)
got stomped in Syria. Why do you think they'll win the far more difficult fight in Ukraine?
To quote a Ukrainian soldier, as quoted by a pro-Western outlet prior to the doomed Kherson 'counteroffensive':
“There is no counteroffensive and there won’t be. There might be an imitation of one but there won’t be a real one. We absolutely do not have the weaponry for one. The Russians feel completely comfortable in their positions … they are not scared of us; there’s no reason to be scared of us. For each missile that we launch, they launch 50, 40, 30. Of course, the proportions can change depending on the situation. We don’t have offensive equipment. You can’t launch an offensive with Himars.”
