I think you are on to a fundamental difference: The Soviets and Russians I am certain had capable people at all levels, but their government system and military made it impossible for them to be capable overall.
They built a lot of hardware, and had a lot of people in uniform.
The hardware was not bad in some cases, not as good as ours in all cases, but adequate and somewhat capable in the hands of people who knew how to use it.
However, I never had the feeling they trained the same way our forces did, even in the Seventies when money was so tight we had trouble training. But we kept at it and trained hard the best way we could, even with a degradation of funds to do so.
Training, maintenance, and logistics. Those are the underpinnings, and I have always felt the Soviets and Russians lacked those things in depth.
But they have always had plenty of bodies to throw at things.
Just my opinion.
#37. Good insights, thanks.
“The hardware was not bad in some cases, not as good as ours in all cases, but adequate and somewhat capable in the hands of people who knew how to use it.”
A classic example off this is the AK47 vs the M16.
The AK47 was not nearly as well engineered weapon as the M16 but proved to be a much more reliable weapon especially in some environments.
At least not as we or the British have them.
And the NCOs are the backbone of our military. No officer around? Your NCO will know what to do.
No officer around in most of the world's military? Everything stops.