7 ms·

I think we need to consider the possibility that much of the Russian army only existed on paper, and that the true strength was overinflated by trickling up goo

by boc 5y ago

I think we need to consider the possibility that much of the Russian army only existed on paper, and that the true strength was overinflated by trickling up good news only throughout all ranks of the military.[1] Readiness was overstated. Equipment was overstated. Training was for parades, not combat. Everyone in the Russian military had assumed they'd never actually fight a real war, so they could grift and sell rations on the side. Putin didn't realize that his military was hollowed-out when he made the call to invade, and thus everyone scrambled to fill in the gaps of their units with conscripts. That's why we're seeing an unusually high number of captured Russian forces who appear to have nearly no military training or experience. We've seen bizarre tactics that make no sense - tanks being abandoned, APCs driving with no support, etc. It stands to reason that if we're asking "Where's the Russian Air Force?", the answer is that it may never have existed in the size we thought. IMO this is a more logical answer than trying to figure out some 3D chess strategy of why Russia wouldn't their planes during the largest invasion since WWII. [1] https://www.vox.com/2016/2/23/11092614/putin-army-threat https://www.vox.com/2016/2/23/11092614/putin-army-threat

whimsicalism 5y ago
I think we know the Russian air force exists from Syria. For ground troops, you may very well be right - they have been heavily relying on private military corps for a while now.
- selectodude 5y ago
  The Russian air force "exists", in that they have planes and pilots and bombs. But in what quantities and in what condition is a huge question. Furthermore, are they as good at flying in relatively contested airspace as is implied. Russia had total air superiority in Syria, Georgia, the Donbas, and the Caucasus. Ukraine has an army that actually exists and is being armed with some pretty high tech shit from the west.
criddell 5y ago
> the true strength was overinflated by trickling up When I watched HBO's excellent Chernobyl that was one of the recurring themes. Everybody is lying to their superiors and nobody wants to hear bad news and they suffer because if it. I assumed that was probably exaggerated for the sake of drama but maybe it was actually understated?
- jiggawatts 5y ago
  It was spot on.
  - kahrl 5y ago
    The tips weren't made of graphite!
- 015a 5y ago
  Even this recent video, which presents a bad look for their leadership, they were alright with it being public; it must be the best case, and it subtly presents a leadership structure within the Russian government that is both disorganized, and systemically fearful of Putin. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucEs0nBuowE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucEs0nBuowE
- matkoniecz 5y ago
  > I assumed that was probably exaggerated for the sake of drama Communist countries were full of blatant incompetence, lying about what actually happens, mismanagement, stealing and strategic deliberate incompetence. Just look at state of economy of communist block and why USSR failed.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  From a formerly Communist Czechoslovakia: if telling the truth results in a punishment, everyone will learn to lie habitually. Of course the resulting system is pretty brittle to shocks.
ALittleLight 5y ago
Another part of this is US intelligence sources have an incentive to overstate Russia's strength. A strong scary Russia better justifies American military spending.
- itronitron 5y ago
  Unfortunately that masks the scarier scenario of a failing state with thousands of nuclear weapons.
  - rurp 5y ago
    While both scenarios are terrifying, I don't agree that the failing state is scarier. Nuclear weapons take a lot organizational skill and competence to maintain and deploy, which gets much harder for a failing state to muster. Plus we've been through this before with the Soviet Union where a disturbing number of nukes went unaccounted for, but none managed to get deployed by terrorists. By contrast, a functioning dictatorship means a single madman can pretty much decide to destroy humanity at any point.
mysecretaccount 5y ago
Hopefully this is true of their nuclear arsenal...
UncleOxidant 5y ago
Good (and long) analysis thread on this on twitter: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1497993363076915204?s=20&t=AznkM8Ahap-fXdZ6IkhSvg https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1497993363076915204?s... "Why Russia will lose this war? Much of the "realist" discourse is about accepting Putin's victory, cuz it's guaranteed. But how do we know it is? I'll argue that analysts 1) overrate Russian army 2) underrate Ukrainian one 3) misunderstand Russian strategy & political goals" Kamil Galeev
excalibur 5y ago
> It stands to reason that if we're asking "Where's the Russian Air Force?", the answer is that it may never have existed in the size we thought. IMO this is a more logical answer than trying to figure out some 3D chess strategy of why Russia wouldn't their planes during the largest invasion since WWII. It's not that hard to figure out. Putin is saving his planes for something big. Direct conflict with NATO being the most likely (and of course scariest) answer. This does not necessarily mean that he wants or intends to fight NATO, just that he sees it as a strong enough possibility that he's willing to incur heavy losses in the short term in order to conserve his strength.
immibis 5y ago
Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.
cycomanic 5y ago
You might be correct to some degree. I suspect though, what played an even bigger role is that Putin and many of his higher ups, really seem to have believed this would be a very easy invasion and their troops would be welcome like liberators. Just read the gloating pre-prepared "we won" article that was released accidentally [1], it really seems like they were believing their own propaganda. [1] https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/02/28/the-kremlins-propaganda-machine-is-running-at-full-throttle https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/02/28/the-kremlins-pro...

by boc 5y ago

whimsicalism 5y ago

I think we know the Russian air force exists from Syria. For ground troops, you may very well be right - they have been heavily relying on private military corps for a while now.

selectodude 5y ago
The Russian air force "exists", in that they have planes and pilots and bombs. But in what quantities and in what condition is a huge question. Furthermore, are they as good at flying in relatively contested airspace as is implied. Russia had total air superiority in Syria, Georgia, the Donbas, and the Caucasus. Ukraine has an army that actually exists and is being armed with some pretty high tech shit from the west.

criddell 5y ago

> the true strength was overinflated by trickling up When I watched HBO's excellent Chernobyl that was one of the recurring themes. Everybody is lying to their superiors and nobody wants to hear bad news and they suffer because if it. I assumed that was probably exaggerated for the sake of drama but maybe it was actually understated?

jiggawatts 5y ago
It was spot on.
- kahrl 5y ago
  The tips weren't made of graphite!
015a 5y ago
Even this recent video, which presents a bad look for their leadership, they were alright with it being public; it must be the best case, and it subtly presents a leadership structure within the Russian government that is both disorganized, and systemically fearful of Putin. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucEs0nBuowE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucEs0nBuowE
matkoniecz 5y ago
> I assumed that was probably exaggerated for the sake of drama Communist countries were full of blatant incompetence, lying about what actually happens, mismanagement, stealing and strategic deliberate incompetence. Just look at state of economy of communist block and why USSR failed.
inglor_cz 5y ago
From a formerly Communist Czechoslovakia: if telling the truth results in a punishment, everyone will learn to lie habitually. Of course the resulting system is pretty brittle to shocks.

ALittleLight 5y ago

Another part of this is US intelligence sources have an incentive to overstate Russia's strength. A strong scary Russia better justifies American military spending.

itronitron 5y ago
Unfortunately that masks the scarier scenario of a failing state with thousands of nuclear weapons.
- rurp 5y ago
  While both scenarios are terrifying, I don't agree that the failing state is scarier. Nuclear weapons take a lot organizational skill and competence to maintain and deploy, which gets much harder for a failing state to muster. Plus we've been through this before with the Soviet Union where a disturbing number of nukes went unaccounted for, but none managed to get deployed by terrorists. By contrast, a functioning dictatorship means a single madman can pretty much decide to destroy humanity at any point.

mysecretaccount 5y ago

Hopefully this is true of their nuclear arsenal...

UncleOxidant 5y ago

Good (and long) analysis thread on this on twitter: https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1497993363076915204?s=20&t=AznkM8Ahap-fXdZ6IkhSvg https://twitter.com/kamilkazani/status/1497993363076915204?s... "Why Russia will lose this war? Much of the "realist" discourse is about accepting Putin's victory, cuz it's guaranteed. But how do we know it is? I'll argue that analysts 1) overrate Russian army 2) underrate Ukrainian one 3) misunderstand Russian strategy & political goals" Kamil Galeev

excalibur 5y ago

> It stands to reason that if we're asking "Where's the Russian Air Force?", the answer is that it may never have existed in the size we thought. IMO this is a more logical answer than trying to figure out some 3D chess strategy of why Russia wouldn't their planes during the largest invasion since WWII. It's not that hard to figure out. Putin is saving his planes for something big. Direct conflict with NATO being the most likely (and of course scariest) answer. This does not necessarily mean that he wants or intends to fight NATO, just that he sees it as a strong enough possibility that he's willing to incur heavy losses in the short term in order to conserve his strength.

immibis 5y ago

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

cycomanic 5y ago

You might be correct to some degree. I suspect though, what played an even bigger role is that Putin and many of his higher ups, really seem to have believed this would be a very easy invasion and their troops would be welcome like liberators. Just read the gloating pre-prepared "we won" article that was released accidentally [1], it really seems like they were believing their own propaganda. [1] https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/02/28/the-kremlins-propaganda-machine-is-running-at-full-throttle https://www.economist.com/europe/2022/02/28/the-kremlins-pro...