ABATTBQ11 said:
I don't understand how anyone continues to take the Russian MOD's numbers or assessments at face value. Their claims have historically been greatly overstated.
I would estimate the Russian numbers are generally inflated about 30 to 40 percent. There's no reason to believe what is told by folks like Putin, Prigozhin, Shoigu, Jinping, Xiden, or of course saint Zelensky.
Quote:
In the spring of 2023 the Ukrainian army was much weaker than when the war started. The Russian military had grown and was stronger. It also had well prepared positions. 'Western' politicians, the propagandized public and military commands failed to recognize those facts.
NATO had simulated the Ukrainian counter-offensive:
Quote:
Logic dictates that any responsible use of the KORA simulation system would have predicted the failure of the 47th Brigade's attack. According to The Washington Post, the officers of the 47th Brigade "planned their assaults and then let the [KORA] program show them the results how their Russian enemies might respond, where they could make a breakthrough and where they would suffer losses." The KORA simulation allowed the Ukrainian officers to coordinate their actions "to test how they'd work together on the battlefield."
Given that the Ukrainian force structure was insufficient to accomplish the mission-critical task of suppression, there was no chance for the Ukrainian forces to accomplish the actual assault requirements of a breaching operation the destruction of enemy forces on the opposite side of the obstacle barrier being breached. The Ukrainians, however, came away from their KORA experience confident that they had crafted a winning plan capable of overcoming the Russian defenses in and around Orekhov.
When one examines the structure of a KORA-based simulation, it becomes clear that the system is completely dependent upon the various inputs which define the simulation as a whole.
Quote:
The weekend edition of the German business daily headlines: "This isn't a counter-offensive. It is a bloody crash test."
It is now time to acknowledge that the western military assumptions were completely wrong:
Quote:
In its early phases, Ukraine's counteroffensive is having less success and Russian forces are showing more competence than western assessments expected, two western officials and a senior US military official tell CNN.
The counteroffensive is "not meeting expectations on any front," one of the officials said.
According to the Western assessments, Russian lines of defense have been proving well-fortified, making it difficult for Ukrainian forces to breach them. In addition, Russian forces have had success bogging down Ukrainian armor with missile attacks and mines and have been deploying air power more effectively.
Ukrainian forces are proving "vulnerable" to minefields and Russian forces "competent" in their defense, one of the Western officials said.
Even the neoconservative Institute for the Study of War was forced to eat some tiny bits of craw and to acknowledge the competence of the Russian forces:
Quote:
The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) responded to the Ukrainian attack with an uncharacteristic degree of coherency and praised Southern Military District elements for repelling the attack and regaining lost positions.
Anyone who thinks that coherency is uncharacteristic for the Russians should go back and read up on Operation Bagration.
ISW also writes:
Quote:
Russian forces appear to have executed their formal tactical defensive doctrine in response to the Ukrainian attacks ...
Well, what did the ISW 'experts' expect? That the Russians would use their manuals as toilet paper and run away when the turkey shooting begins?
In their utter stupidity the neoconservatives probably really believed that.
The assessments made did not acknowledge the dubious quality of freshly stood up Ukrainian forces.
They did not acknowledge the changes and growth in the military structures on the Russian side. They failed to recognize the quality of the Russian fortifications and military capabilities and the deep roots of their doctrine.
The results are the consequence of ignoring reality, of seeing what one wants to see.
The politics of this war demanded that the 'western' side wins. NATO military was biased towards that. Instead of telling the politicians what a realistic outcome would be it delivered hopeful assessments that defied reality.
It's interesting that some analysts like Scott Ritter are 'not respectable' yet folks still stick by silly ISW propaganda on the other hand.
I remain more convinced than ever, this week, that we are not being presented the truth about the war, in either it's cost or planning. Team Xiden is 100 percent interested in covering up the Biden crime family corruption in Ukraine/Russia/China.
I recognize there is some cognitive dissonance among those who bought the PR/lies, but the myth of the UFA 'spring offensive' as we approach July has failed...by design. It's pointless, politically driven at best.
But the Ukrainians just want to fight for their sovereignty under Zelensky!
Again, thanks to those above for at least pausing long enough to consider alternative viewpoints. There is no 'good' side in Ukraine.
