3 ms·

As a layman with some interest in military history due to decades of playing strategy games: That sentiment has been popular since the Gulf War, at least. I th

As a layman with some interest in military history due to decades of playing strategy games: That sentiment has been popular since the Gulf War, at least. I think the public perception has been shaped by American doctrine. It emphasizes throwing massive amounts of money and technology at the enemy, in order to avoid casualties that could make the war unpopular at home. When the US goes to war, it tends to spend more money than the entire economy of the other side. If the war drags on, that level of spending may continue for years. Almost nobody else can afford that. Cheap(ish) drones and missiles have worked great for Ukraine in defense. However, Ukrainian forces have not had similar success in offensive operations. Ukraine continues asking for boring old-fashioned tanks and artillery, probably because their generals believe that can help them take back lost territory. They could probably achieve similar results with aircraft and precision munitions, but that would require outspending Russia, which is not happening even with all the military aid from the West. Tanks are still cost-effective, but they are also vulnerable. You can lower casualties by using less cost-effective weapons systems, but only if you are economically superior to the enemy and willing to spend the money. That option is out of the table if you are in an all-out war against an economic peer or a superior enemy.

topspin 5y ago
> Ukraine continues asking for boring old-fashioned tanks and artillery, probably because their generals believe that can help them take back lost territory. Ukraine has explicitly asked for Western aircraft, F-15s and F-16s in particular, and UAVs such as Reapers. Those requests were public knowledge 5 weeks ago. Ukraine's command believe tanks and artillery will conquer territory because that's actually happening on a daily basis, most recently around Kharkiv. They believe better artillery will enable offensive operations in late May or June, and they're correct. Right now Russia has an indirect firepower advantage they're using to advance slowly in Donbas. When that advantage vanishes because the enemy has longer range, more mobile and accurate weapons they will fold and territory will be ceded back to Ukraine.
- jltsiren 5y ago
  In the short term, Russia has the military advantage. In the medium term, Ukraine will probably gain the advantage, but it's unclear if it will be sufficient to drive the Russian forces out quickly enough. Because in the long term, Ukrainian economy and infrastructure are collapsing, and they still have something like 35 million civilians to feed. Fossil fuels are particularly problematic. If Ukraine can't import energy from Russia, Belarus, or over the Black Sea, the only remaining choice is Europe. But Europe is facing a shortage of its own, because most countries are trying to phase out energy imports from Russia. If they can't buy enough for their own needs, they may not share enough with Ukraine.

topspin 5y ago

> Ukraine continues asking for boring old-fashioned tanks and artillery, probably because their generals believe that can help them take back lost territory. Ukraine has explicitly asked for Western aircraft, F-15s and F-16s in particular, and UAVs such as Reapers. Those requests were public knowledge 5 weeks ago. Ukraine's command believe tanks and artillery will conquer territory because that's actually happening on a daily basis, most recently around Kharkiv. They believe better artillery will enable offensive operations in late May or June, and they're correct. Right now Russia has an indirect firepower advantage they're using to advance slowly in Donbas. When that advantage vanishes because the enemy has longer range, more mobile and accurate weapons they will fold and territory will be ceded back to Ukraine.

jltsiren 5y ago
In the short term, Russia has the military advantage. In the medium term, Ukraine will probably gain the advantage, but it's unclear if it will be sufficient to drive the Russian forces out quickly enough. Because in the long term, Ukrainian economy and infrastructure are collapsing, and they still have something like 35 million civilians to feed. Fossil fuels are particularly problematic. If Ukraine can't import energy from Russia, Belarus, or over the Black Sea, the only remaining choice is Europe. But Europe is facing a shortage of its own, because most countries are trying to phase out energy imports from Russia. If they can't buy enough for their own needs, they may not share enough with Ukraine.