Posted on 08/26/2022 8:04:46 PM PDT by FarCenter
...
An American military intelligence officer points to historical precedents for such odd hesitation by Russian forces over the past two months.
He cites the observation by BH Liddell Hart of the puzzling behavior of the Russians in World War II after the critical victory at Kursk: Advance of Russian forces was very slow and never able to decisively exploit obvious holes in the German line. But the successes kept coming and the Red Army leadership never risked or incurred a major loss or a major flanking movement again as had happened at the outset of Germany’s Operation Barbarossa.
It’s a valid and important observation. The initial Russian rush in Kiev was clearly based on faulty intelligence inspiring sloppy Blitzkrieg-type advances without in-depth logistical back-up.
It was the very opposite of the doctrine of “deep operations”, which had been developed by Russian Marshal Mikhail Tukhachevsky prior to WWII and prior to his political purge by Joseph Stalin in 1937. Although Tukhachevsky did not survive, his doctrine did: Stalin to his credit allowed his top generals to execute it after the initial defeats in 1941.
In an offensive mode, “deep operations” call for assault actions over a very wide front – underpinned by the principle of simultaneity attained by creating the largest possible contact area in order to force the enemy to forego tactical depth. The Russian mode after Kursk was to probe and attack on a broad front with combined-arms force.
Probes would be exploratory but hard enough to be defended and to establish a favorable attrition rate and – at a given moment – to achieve local superiority. This would be the time and place to deploy the “shock army” so far kept in reserve but then inserted into the breach for an operational breakthrough.
The Red Army after Kursk enjoyed both manpower and firepower superiority but still lacked mobility to counter rapid tactical flanking maneuvers by the enemy. Proceeding slowly and methodically was the appropriate tactical answer.
It looks and sounds familiar. Importantly, and unlike the Red Army in 1943, Russian forces at present also enjoy virtual total air superiority. Under these circumstances, a significant massing of forces by the Ukrainians for a breakthrough offensive would be a fool’s errand.
It would run into the same devastating deep operations trap as did German generals Erich von Manstein and Guenther von Kluge.
Standard military doctrine is a 3-to-1 ratio of attacker versus defender, especially an entrenched defender (see Europe’s West Wall, 1944).<p.
Russia’s doctrine in this Special Military Operation is a 1-to-3 ratio - a complete reversal of accepted doctrine.
May 13, 2022 at 10:33 am ET
The Numbers: How a Simple Ratio Came to Influence Military Strategy
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-2022-05-13/card/enndMPgiluy7LkrV3VsG
“”Early in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it wasn’t just Moscow that believed its offensive could succeed quickly. In February, even U.S. officials warned Kyiv could fall in days.
Russians had numbers on their side, or more precisely a number: the 3:1 rule, the ratio by which attackers must outnumber defenders in order to prevail. It is one of several “force ratios” popular in military strategy. Russia, it seemed, could amass that advantage.
The war in Ukraine has brought renewed interest in force ratios. Other ratios in military doctrine include the numbers needed to defeat unprepared defenders, resist counterinsurgencies or counterattack flanks. Though they sound like rules of thumb for a board game like Risk, the ratios have been taught to generations of both American and Soviet and then Russian tacticians, and provide intuitive support for the idea Ukraine was extremely vulnerable.””
The Russians didn't have a 3-to-1 advantage near Kiev.
It’s called projection as well as blatant disinformation aimed at keeping the West/EU/US/UK/NATO pumping money and arms into Ukraine....to no avail.
If we get the mass of Western/US/EU/UK/NATO sheeple to believe that the Russians had a 3:1 advantage going into Ukraine instead of Ukraine having the 3:1 advantage, half the battle for Ukraine is won. /s
A chess game can be won by storming the opponent’s castled king, or by slowly grinding down the opponent, trading pieces and emerging with a single passed pawn in the endgame.
This conflict is an example of the latter strategy.
Right.
I looked at his numbers and his graphics and his splash, and there was no beef there.
Media children like him depend on innumerate Merkuns being overawed by their "command of the numbers".
Most people are allergic to numbers, so it's pretty easy to snow them.
That's my favorite method of playing chess.
It's all about position at the end of the game.
Graph showing roughly Ukraine’s numbers:
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/image-3.jpeg
And we all know that Russia did not ‘invade’ Ukraine with 1.5 million men...not even close.
‘Russia’s Destruction of the Ukraine Military’
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2022/08/19/russias-destruction-of-the-ukraine-military/
*MAGA First/Anti-War/Anti-Globalist Ping*
If you want on or off this list, please let me know.
Who does the author think is going to win the Super Bowl this year.
“The Numbers: How a Simple Ratio Came to Influence Military Strategy
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/russia-ukraine-latest-news-2022-05-13/card/enndMPgiluy7LkrV3VsG“
Thank you so much for your comment. I appreciate this as quality resource
At this point, the Russian objective appears to be to kill and wound Ukrainian soldiers using artillery.
Taking territory is not an objective, since supply lines lengthen and the area has to be garrisoned and pacified.
Instead, air power is used to keep the Ukrainian units immobilized, while Russian units appear able to shift their units along the roughly 500 mile front and gain numerical advantage at their chosen points of attack. Then the tactic of probing to identify positions followed by shelling is used.
NO! Ukraine is winning big! Stupid Russians keep losing men in their foolish attacks. Super weapons like the Turkish Drones and American and British super rockets continue to blast ammo dumps and airports. Victory is coming fast! Russians are beaten—All we need do is send more Billions, maybe 199 Billion worth of Weapons. Maybe a No Fly Zone and maybe an expeditionary force of 500,000 US Military Advisors—And Russia will be forced out of Ukraine forever! Isn’t it worth it? End Russia and Free her Millions of people to live Free like Ukraine!
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.
