The tactics are interesting and the manuals are useful for potential team and unit leads, but there are some underlying principles you can spread and scale fast

The tactics are interesting and the manuals are useful for potential team and unit leads, but there are some underlying principles you can spread and scale faster than a a tactical instruction manual. A sense of immutable shared identity will isolate an occupier from support and create infinite long term costs. The economy of the occupation has to be worth it for the occupier, which means there is some strategic asset a resistance can deprive them of. I don't know if the Ukranian people have this, but group identity is probably the most powerful tool of all. What does Russia get out of Ukraine? The Dnieper River, secured ports on the Black Sea and its resources, international / continental shipping routes for Russian exports that don't have to go through multiple countries. The capability of maintining long term hidden artillery batterys down the Dnieper that can sink boats, and air strikes on ships in the Black Sea would make an occupation diseconomic as compared to a trade agreement. I suspect the calculus for the invasion was based on how Ukraine had become too much of a political risk as a choke point for securing Russian economic expansion and a need to secure long term export routes, and then the political weakness of the US/NATO in the form of its low likelihood of imposing serious consequences set the incentives up so the decision to invade practically made itself. There could be a compromise where Russia gets a continuous border on the Black Sea, and Ukraine cedes that territory, but survives as a nation, with the condition that it will be flattened if the new smaller nation joins NATO. Ukraine needs to survive, and a resistance that accepted the lost strategic territory but fought a long war of attrition over the less strategic areas could secure their independent existence because once Russia takes the land and sea routes it needs, the costs of holding the rest of the territory make a new peace more economical in the face of an ethnic Ukranian resistance killing Russians for decades over land that doesn't have as significant return on the costs to hold it. These economics are likely why Afghanistan and Vietnam were so successful, as they fought for identity and over land and territory the occupiers didn't get a return on their investment and huge costs on.