Topic: Why Russia isn't using it's full force in Ukraine ? tactically .. - page 9. (Read 1369 times)

You are not talking about Peter the Great, for sure.

If you already making such a fuss, you could ask American Natives, (East) Germans, (West) Japanese, Vietnamese, Syrians, Afghans, ... - I even don't know where to stop - about their satisfaction about US politics.

It cannot be said that Russia does not use all its power in Ukraine. On February 24, eight Russian armies invaded Ukraine from three sides of its borders. The number of invading occupiers is roughly estimated at 190,000. Moreover, they all invaded on the corresponding military armored vehicles. The large length of the borders of Ukraine, which was attacked, did not allow a good rebuff to the enemy from Ukraine right at its borders, especially since the number of Russian troops and equipment many times exceeded the Armed Forces of Ukraine and if they began to defend themselves at the borders, they would be defeated . Therefore, the Russians were allowed inside the country and began to be beaten in small mobile groups. As we moved towards Kyiv, resistance increased until the large columns, sometimes tens of color meters long, stopped completely. The Ukrainians skillfully used the landscape, setting up various ambushes and blowing up bridges in the way of the aggressor. The Russians were not ready for such a war. Near Kyiv, the Russians were finally stopped and methodically destroyed so that the Kremlin soon realized that they could completely lose the invading forces. Therefore, it was decided to withdraw the rather battered parts of Russian troops from the northern part of Ukraine and concentrate only in the east and south. Kyiv and the main cities in the center and in the northern part of Ukraine were not captured by Russian soldiers.

Now, after the failure of the first stage of the war by Russia in Ukraine, the second stage is also ending without tangible results for Russia, in which Russia tried to completely capture the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine and its southern regions, as well as encircle and destroy the main army of Ukraine.

As of yesterday, Russia lost in Ukraine 26,900 soldiers killed, about 70,000 wounded, 1,205 tanks, 2,900 armored vehicles, 200 aircraft, 162 helicopters, 542 artillery systems, 193 multiple launch rocket systems, 88 air defense systems, 2,042 vehicles were destroyed, 405 UAVs, 13 ships and boats. As can be seen from the scale of the battles, this is the bloodiest war since World War II.
Russia loses in it thanks to the professionalism and heroism of the Armed Forces of Ukraine and its people, who defend their freedom and independence, while Russian soldiers are absolutely unmotivated and, moreover, poorly prepared for it.

Normally I wouldn't even waste time defending the US against a statement like that, but give me a break.  Throughout its history, Russian leaders have been notorious in terms of their ruthlessness.  Do you have anything you want to compare to Stalin's reign?  So the American in me says you can find some other gripe to insert in a thread about the Russia/Ukraine conflict.

And OP, I haven't been following the situation too closely as of late but I was kind of wondering the same thing as well.  I would have thought that if the Russian resolve to conquer Ukraine was great enough, they would have employed blitzkreig tactics instead of whatever it is they're doing.  They've got nuclear capability, FFS, so I don't think I'd be faulted for assuming that any country would rather surrender and not fight than risk something truly terrifying and devastating happening.

I'd be very interested to hear others' opinions on this, too.

Think about it — if they used full force in their offense, what if some other powerhouse country would go offensive on them? Their defense would probably lack.

But who knows, really. I'm pretty sure neither of us here really know what we're talking about when it comes to proper troop/asset allocations when it comes to war lol.

Russia has used it's full force against Ukraine, it is just completely incompetent and showed how its military is definitely not superpower status. The Russian air force only had success in places like Syria because they were fighting rebels, stuck in a civil war without an organized government. Russia has shown they are no match for even a semi competent military and that truly is pathetic. The military in Russia was run by corruption, just like every other part of the country, and they never thought that one day they might actually have to utilize the equipment where they skimmed that money. It is crazy how badly trained they are and there is a distinct lack of communication even between troops 20 meters apart.

Did you miss the part where they landed paratroops next to Kiev and had to retreat because they cannot control the air space? You seem oblivious to so much.

Because Russians are not Americans.

Casualties:
- Russia in Ukraine: ~ 2300
- USA in Iraq: the numbers range from 151,000 to over 1,000,000

Enough said.

Why Russia isn't using it's full force in Ukraine ?

Why the russians are allowing the ukrainens to win ... they had Kiev in their hands and then they retreat ,it makes no sense,tactically it makes no sense ... as a general i would have bombed Kiev like Mariupol or worse ...

Russia has a lot of resources ...ammo never finishes for russians ...you had Kiev in your hands why would you give it back ? ...no sense ...


https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/2/why-hasnt-russia-mobilised-its-vast-air-power-against-ukraine