|
|
|
|
|
by toast0
1568 days ago
|
|
> Sending the weapons to Ukraine amounts to little, in the face of overwhelming Russian military advantage. The difference in number of troops isn't as important as it seems numerically if the Russian morale and training is as low as it seems it might be based on reports on western media (which could be iffy). The difference in equipment isn't as important if it can't make it into Ukraine. Here's where anti-air and anti-tank weapons make a big difference. So far, it seems like Russia hasn't been able to take control of airfields, and anti-air weapons help contest air superiority. Russia also seems to have trouble with supply lines, anti-tank weapons work against tanks as well as armored transport vehicles. Urkaine has an easier job here, repelling an occupation is easier than waging one. If they keep high morale and continue to have access to effective weaponry, this is going to be costly for Russia's military. (As it was for Russia and the US in Afghanistan) Perhaps Russia is playing soft, and will turn up the heat, but perhaps they miscalculated with regard to what they could achieve. |
|