- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 82,844
- Reaction score
- 67,788
- Location
- Barsoom
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Russia's failure to take down Kyiv was a defeat for the ages
Yablonska street in Bucha. What posessed the Russians to order their armor into this narrow roadway? Hubris?
I am personally stunned at not only the "war crimes unprofessionalism" of the Russian military, but also their extreme lack of competence on the modern battlefield.
Compounding this demonstration in military ineptness is the inescapable fact that Ukraine is right next door!
Yablonska street in Bucha. What posessed the Russians to order their armor into this narrow roadway? Hubris?
4.5.22
Kyiv was a Russian defeat for the ages. The fight started poorly for the invaders and went downhill from there. When President Vladimir Putin launched his war on Feb. 24 after months of buildup on Ukraine's borders, he sent hundreds of helicopter-borne commandos — the best of the best of Russia's “spetsnaz” special forces soldiers — to assault and seize a lightly defended airfield on Kyiv's doorstep. Other Russian forces struck elsewhere across Ukraine, including toward the eastern city of Kharkiv as well as in the contested Donbas region and along the Black Sea coast. But as the seat of national power, Kyiv was the main prize. Thus the thrust by elite airborne forces in the war's opening hours. But Putin failed to achieve his goal of quickly crushing Ukraine’s outgunned and outnumbered army. The Russians were ill-prepared for Ukrainian resistance, proved incapable of adjusting to setbacks, failed to effectively combine air and land operations, misjudged Ukraine’s ability to defend its skies, and bungled basic military functions like planning and executing the movement of supplies. “That’s a really bad combination if you want to conquer a country,” said Peter Mansoor, a retired Army colonel and professor of military history at Ohio State University. For now at least, Putin's forces have shifted away from Kyiv, to eastern Ukraine. Ultimately, the Russian leader may achieve some of his objectives. Yet his failure to seize Kyiv will be long remembered — for how it defied prewar expectations and exposed surprising weaknesses in a military thought to be one of the strongest in the world.
“It’s stunning,” said military historian Frederick Kagan of the Institute for the Study of War, who says he knows of no parallel to a major military power like Russia invading a country at the time of its choosing and failing so utterly. The Russians underestimated the number of troops they would need and showed “an astonishing inability” to perform basic military functions. They vastly misjudged what it would take to win the battle for Kyiv, he says. “This was going to be hard even if the Russian army had proven itself to be competent,” he said. “It’s proven itself to be wholly incapable of conducting modern armored warfare.” On March 25, barely a month after the invasion began, the Russians declared they had achieved their goals in the Kyiv region and would shift focus to the separatist Donbas area in eastern Ukraine. Some suspected a Putin ploy to buy time without giving up his maximalist aims, but within days the Kyiv retreat was in full view. Putin may yet manage to refocus his war effort on a narrower goal of expanding Russian control in the Donbas and perhaps securing a land corridor from the Donbas to the Crimean Peninsula. But his failure in Kyiv revealed weaknesses that suggest Russia is unlikely to try again soon to take down the national capital. “I think they learned their lesson,” said Mansoor.
I am personally stunned at not only the "war crimes unprofessionalism" of the Russian military, but also their extreme lack of competence on the modern battlefield.
Compounding this demonstration in military ineptness is the inescapable fact that Ukraine is right next door!