"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (8 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


So what you're saying is that playing defense for twenty years set up the conditions for their victory. Got it.

Bear in mind that the main reason why they won was that we'd already decided we were tired of spending blood and money there. Their final offensive was simply the period at the end of a long, run-on sentence.


Little of that donated weaponry is offensive, though. Towed howitzers, Javelins, Stingers, but no airplanes and precious few tanks. Not much transport for their infantry, either.

So again I ask: Go on the offensive with what? What capabilities do you think they can use to carry forward a successful offensive?
 
Ukraine has to time this right though with offensive action being targeted at weak points as they arise.
Agreed. Much of the Russian army has its back to Ukraine as they deal with Mariupol. If, and and a big if, the Ukrainians have the forces now is a good a chance to hit the Russians, since once Mariupol is defeated the Russians will turn around and concentrate their forces on the offensive. If the Ukrainians do not have the forces now for an offensive, they need to whittle down the Russians, as you suggest and prepare to hit them when the latter are weakest.
 
Last edited:
That is the best strategy for the long term.

Entirely agree. If you're planning your defense correctly, you can select the ground where you want to fight. That was as true today as it was at Gettysburg. Offensives can be very expensive whereas an effective, well planned defence is less costly in terms of losses…and Ukraine needs to carefully husband it's military forces.
 
I can see the next Russian offensive bypassing the major cities in the east and advancing all the way to the Dnieper. The besieged cities will fight, of course but it will be a matter of time before ammo runs out and no western resupply, short of air-drops, will be possible.
 
Besides a defensive war will be more in the intrest of nato. It will bleed the russian forces more the a ukraine offensive.
NATO consists of fickle, pragmatic countries. Their united position will eventually falter, even now the German unions are protesting Berlin's plan to stop buying Russian oil by end of 2022. Pro-Russian Greeks are protesting on the streets that the sanctions and anti-Russian action are impacting tourism. Bulgarians with Russian flags protested a recent NATO visit. I have little faith that the Italians, French, Bulgarians, etc. have the long-term staying power to keep up their opposition to Russia. Once Putin takes the Donbass and the land bridge to Crimea he may very well declare a unilateral ceasefire and call for negotiations with Kyiv. The Ukrainians will have to attend the talks, and stand down their own troops while they take place. At that point, the weaker-minded/spined Euros will be calling for peace and pressuring Zelensky to come to terms. If this happens, Ukraine will never regain those territories.

So, a defensive war is good for NATO, but not necessarily for Ukraine. And the Ukrainians know it, which is why they're asking for offensive weapons, tanks, APCs and IFVs, mobile artillery including MRLS like the HIMARS, strike aircraft, mobile long range SAMs, etc. in addition to the more defensive man portable missiles and small arms. They know that the window for offensive action before any ceasefire and forced negotiations is closing.
 
Last edited:
I don't think the Battle of the Atlantic should be categorized as "Defensive". The air campaign against the U-boats was an offensive strategy.

Jim
That came later after the defence stage where air cover was not complete. At that stage the U-boats were on the offensive.
 
Ukraine forces stalled the initial Russian offensive with defense and counter-attack tactics.

They're doing a remarkable job with what they have and are using their home-turf knowledge to great advantage.

This has become a war of attrition and the Ukrainians are bleeding the Russians beyond sustainable levels.

In WWII, the Soviets did the same thing at Stalingrad. They forced the Germans to commit and expend unsustainable levels of men and material.
 
And this time, the Soviets don't have lend lease. The other guy does.
 
sorry to say so but you are wrong at many points as other peoples who are analysing this war just considering numbers
 
Memories of the Kursk and Putin's neglect of families. The video of the sailor's mother being drugged and dragged out of the press conference was horrible.


 
 

Users who are viewing this thread