A properly-sized invasion force given the physical size of Ukraine, and the size of its army, should have been 400,000-600,000 strong. Russia went in with <200,

A properly-sized invasion force given the physical size of Ukraine, and the size of its army, should have been 400,000-600,000 strong. Russia went in with <200,000, with its force structure badly allocated (not enough infantrymen or logistics guys), and has still managed to occupy a land area larger than Portugal + Ireland combined. And they've done that with essentially their peacetime standing forces. From the perspective of how the Russian army is "supposed" to fight (with a massive mobilization to flesh out its units), this invasion is essentially with one hand tied behind its back by improper force design/employment, and the other tied by rampant corruption. Still, Russia is beating Ukraine to death with headbutts...and also suffering a TBI in the process. "Quantity has a quality all its own". They aren't considered "strong" because individual Russian battalions are expert warfighters per se. They're considered "strong" because the Russian military-industrial complex in its totality is not something that can be idly ignored by anyone except maybe the US or China. Basically Russia scores high on 3 particular Principles of War: Mass, Offensive, and Simplicity. Not so well on the other 6 though. https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/TBS/B2B2269%20Tactical%20Fundamentals.pdf?ver=2015-06-08-142423-523 https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/TBS/B2B2269...