No one is discussing it, so I will.
The article is about fundamental changes in warfare from WWII through today, which comes down to the tank as the main weapon of blitzkreig like, sharp penetrating attacks of force and maneuver being over.
When we think of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Front, Stalin versus Hitler, we focus our memory on this clash of steel, and see it as one of the most formidable forces of warfare on our planet, even today.
But it is not.
That Soviet army is what we have been preparing for since the early 1950s and perfected against with the Air Land Battle plan of the late 1980s.
The air campaign against Saddam Hussien’s Soviet style tank armies was the proof we had found a way. For a force short on Air assets, guided man portable standoff missiles were the way. That ATGM technology has grown leaps and bounds over the past few decades.
The Russians tried to fight Ukraine using the tank army tactics of 1945. That no longer works. They really should have studied our two wars against Iraq more.
German military theorists eschew the term "Blitzkrieg." Many prefer the term "Bewegungskrieg," which I think is indeed more descriptive.
The Russians tried to fight Ukraine using the tank army tactics of 1945. That no longer works. They really should have studied our two wars against Iraq more.
I wonder if they learned anything from our tumultuous withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Thanks for your thoughts on the subject!
Regards,