Posted on 03/18/2022 10:39:53 AM PDT by Az Joe
Academic inquiry only.
Would doing so serve a clear military purpose? Not really. So how would such an attack benefit Ukraine? At best, it would be a waste of a scarce military resource for the sake of an uncertain political objective — with the risk of the Russians using it to claim that Ukraine had committed a war crime by bombing, say, an elementary school.
Actually, Grozny today looks pretty nice after the Russians flattened all the ugly old Soviet architecture. They’ve built modern skyscrapers.
And now the Chechens are fighting for the Russians. Go figure.
You need to improve your propaganda skills. Notice that when challenged to identify a city you can't. Nice try, but a D- performance.
They have been killing Ukrainian Russian ethnic citizens in Donbass ( Ukraine) pretty much with impunity for 8 years - no need to attack someone who can hit back
NorseViking is a pro-Russian propagandist, and was outed as such some time ago. Don’t feed the trolls.
Study military tactics. One of the best ways to respond to an attack where there are limited roads, like the situation in Ukraine, is to allow the invader to come in and then attack their lines of supply.
A troll? Belgorod and Rostov obviously.
That is clear. Perhaps we should have pity on him since his boss may be getting angry as his efforts fail.
Well written.
you’re right. I stand corrected.
OLD Grozny is gone, and pretty epic from what I read.
I see, so instead of stopping Russian armor and aircraft at the borders, when they had months notice the Russians were coming, they opted to allow them into the country and leave it looking like a smoldering crater, because they’d have better positioning strategy. And if they didn’t allow the Russians into Ukraine, they’d never be able to cut off their supply lines! lol...
Great military strategy!
“One of the best ways to respond to an attack where there are limited roads, like the situation in Ukraine, is to allow the invader to come in and then attack their lines of supply.”
That’s a fact.
“That is clear. Perhaps we should have pity on him...”
Yeah, he is rather pathetic.
Yep. Russia lost the first Chechen War so they came back a few years later and brought their A-game.
I don’t think some people understand about 85 percent of supplies can air dropped in...lol
Actually it is. How would it work to just crash your army head on into the other army along the front they had established? Particularly when both sides have highly accurate artillery and precision munitions, along with air defense systems.
Have we not been told Ukraine can easily take out Russian armor and aircraft? Yes we have.
Did Ukraine not know for months the Russians were amassing at the borders and getting ready to invade? Yes they did. Ukraine had LOTS of time to prepare. No?
So why not stop them at the borders?
“I don’t think some people understand about 85 percent of supplies can air dropped in...lol”
The problem with air-dropped supplies is there has to be someone to quickly retrieve it; and if that someone is not the intended recipient...ooops.
Also, the farther inside the battle zone the greater the risk of the drop going awry, or the aircraft being interdicted and shot down.
Aerial re-supply is great if dropped into a secure and fortified site. But, a lot can go wrong with aerial resupply, including mis-drops, wind, damage upon impact; just a lot of things. That’s one of the reasons that in the US military there is a built-in redundancy for such drops.
Gezzzz, they’ve been doing air drops forever in war venues....C’mon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.