The SC
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2012
- Messages
- 32,233
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
Today, the Russians represent the second conventional force in the world, but they are the undisputed first force as a primarily defensive ground force and an armored assault force.
At the end of the Soviet era, the offensive general mobilization army designed to storm NATO's western territory was equipped with more than three times the number of tanks equipped by the general Russian forces at the current stage!
To carry out a deep penetration of the western fronts, with the idea of landing more than a third of these tanks in a parachute manner, in order to form the offensive thunderbolt shock.
Therefore, NATO thought, since then, of a way to stop this terrible quantitative advance of the Soviet forces towards European soil, without quickly entering into a nuclear war, or even resorting to tactical nuclear and neutron bombs!
Therefore, they hastened to develop several military, tactical and armament scenarios, to defeat these Soviet attacks by making the cities impregnable urban fortresses, which we witnessed against the Russians in the Battle of Kiev in this war in its initial stage, as well as the use of tactical distance weapons with super-artificial sub-munitions that target Russian shields from their weak points. Basically, to neutralize the Russian strengths, and it seems that it had a secret or undeclared use in the war to restore Kharkiv during its recovery from Russian hands, and in 2003 it was tested in Iraq in an air way against armored and mechanical groupings of the Iraqi public and private Republican Guard.
Today, after the NATO leadership failed to drag the Russians into the offensive winter war, it seems that they resorted to the Ukrainian offensive spring or summer war, to drag the Russians to the same first scheme, but this time in a short manner, as a defensive reaction in a counter-defensive way.
The basic idea of this attack is to renew the experience of restoring the Ukrainians’ experience of what the Russians robbed by force of the Kharkiv region or province from the hands of the Ukrainian forces, but in a larger, wider and more mobilizing way for the forces and equipment that the Ukrainian offensive forces will have, after neutralizing most of the Russian armored vehicles in a spaced manner with missiles with counter smart sub.-munitions.
But what is new is that Russia today has a greater number of specialized defense forces than before, with multiple defensive and offensive tasks, with unprecedented crowds and equipment in terms of modernity and technical capabilities, with the development of negative misleading concealment and masking principles, and the development of positive countermeasures to electronic jamming and disinformation, in addition to layers of protection. Anti-all-air missile.
In the Kharkiv province, the Russians were mobilizing a quarter of the forces that Russia is mobilizing today in each of its current provinces, and it withdrew before the Ukrainian attack from Kharkiv the strength of a reinforced combat division to support the Kherson province before the start of the major Ukrainian offensive that could have extended to Luhansk province belonging to the Donbass region, had it not been for the entry of the first defensive reserve army, which was within the border areas, to become an impenetrable barrier to the large Ukrainian offensive extension at that time.
This success was the beginning of the idea of partial reserve mobilization, which today consists of five defensive armies, in addition to five offensive armies, to raise the Russian build-up in Ukraine from 115,000 to more than 600,000, with the presence of secret multi-role reserve forces estimated at 200,000 warriors in the Donbass region.
Will the Ukrainian forces, led by NATO, be able, in such complex circumstances, to make the attack a successful for the second time?!
The truth is that the previous victory of the Ukrainians in Kharkiv was not primarily caused by the large successive Ukrainian crowds attacking the Russian defensive fronts, but rather the secret was in neutralizing the equipment of the heavy reserve forces of the Russian counterattack, which Ukraine often showered their shields with intelligent seeking skeet dishes carried by the double-range GMRS missiles ER up to a range of 160 km, that target the upper parts of the Russian shields. In which the missile in addition to the possibility of the Germans experimenting with a loitering mobile missile that separates from the German Mars missiles parallel to the American tracked MLRS launchers, and this resulted in the absence of counterattacks to support and strengthen the Russian first lines of defense, and this tactic was able to silent most of the Russian long range support fire, which led to the rapid collapse of these first defensive bulwarks.
Will Ukraine repeat this scenario with the help of NATO against the current defense lines that are more fortified and defensive in depth?!
Of course, this is if Russia adheres to defensive positions against the new Ukrainian attack, but the Russians have introduced 1,800 modern tanks to the front, including more than 800 revolutionary T-90M Borrev (breakthrough) tanks and more than 100 future T-14 Armata tanks, which are advanced offensive tanks, and I think Russia will choose this time the middle case, that is, the active defense that will combine defense and attack, but the near attack in order to rearrange the defensive positions.
Hence, we see that the CIA does not question and doubt the success of the Ukrainian attack on the Russian fronts for three reasons, according to this security apparatus. The first, in brief, is the depth and strength of the Russian defenses, and the second is the growing Russian ability to constantly monitor and reconnaissance by means of air in the first place, especially with drones, then satellites, and finally the ground. The third is the quantitative and qualitative air superiority and the increase in the aircraft’s use of smart spacer munitions, including glide bombs, to make them immune from the danger of air defenses as well as those smart missile and glide munitions.
This talk is not propaganda, but rather an accurate description of the state of superiority on the Russian front, especially since the Russian Minister of Defense declared the superiority of the Russian forces in terms of quality, armament and number, and the prospects for unlimited logistical support, compared to the previous initial conditions.
Hence, it is worth asking now, as long as the Ukrainian attack will be a loser by a large percentage, then why would NATO risk this losing adventure?!
To answer that, we say that it will most likely increase its reliance on the shock weapon, which defeats the Russian armored vehicles.
But with means launched from the depths to escape the clutches of Russian counter-air strikes, and I mean from the American HIMARS launchers up to a range of 150 km on the principle of hit and run, after firing missiles that extend the range of small diameter bombs, of which 6 missiles are likely to be fired, and aircraft are also likely to participate. The American Thunderbolt A-10 that America offered before to Ukraine, but not for the remote missions by firing 12 small diameter bombs for a range exceeding 100 km, as is the case in the current conditions, and this bomb, the SDB small diameter bomb with its multiple launch modes, will target fixed and mobile selective targets. The skeet dishes that branch out from the BLU-108B Avcosic bacillus must be launched from the American ATACMS missiles that can be launched from the American HIMARS launchers up to a range of 300 km and at an ultrasonic speed to deploy 24 Avcosict bacillus, but for these missiles there is a Russian-American agreement that they will not enter the Ukrainian war .
Therefore, it seems that the US is carrying out the hybrid operation, and re-manufacturing the Ukrainian Grom 2 tactical missiles to become the content of the American ATACMS missiles in terms of range, speed (Mach 3) and warhead weight (1000 kg), and what is most likely is the leaks stated by the "Military Watch" magazine Where the US military reported that the Russians were able to strike stores of Grom-2 missiles and their launchers inside Ukrainian territory.
Therefore, we find Russia trying to thwart or discourage the attack in a proactive and preventive manner by targeting the basic elements of the attack components according to the documented intelligence information in a visual way, and it is deploying field tracked anti-aircraft platforms, either of the technically and programmatically updated Tor missile, to deal even with 155 mm smart artillery and on tracked vehicles shells. Tunguska hybrid missile artillery with combat towers similar to the towers of the central Pantsir system, and despite the success of the Russians in shooting down the Grom-2 missile and even small-diameter bombs, this will not work if the Ukrainians follow the flooding method, so Russia often may cancel the limited counter-attacks and replace that with starting to use the super destructive weapon, which is the strategic alternative to tactical nuclear bombs, under the pretext of escalation as a reaction against the Kremlin's kamikaze drone attack by Ukraine!
Although the US National Intelligence Director confirmed that Russia would not use a tactical nuclear weapon in response to the Kremlin's strike, she did not indicate the negative effects of the destructive alternatives to the Russian tactical nukes.
The useful conclusion is that the desired strategy for the Ukrainian spring offensive lies in neutralizing the positions of Russian power with American smart munitions, in a way of massive bursts, changing the balance of combat superiority in favor of the Ukrainians, while securing appropriate defensive coverage against Russian air threats.
In the end, the Ukrainian attack may not result in a crushing defeat for the Russians, but perhaps a partial defeat. However, with this partial achievement, Ukraine may have gained a positive trump card, facilitating diplomatic negotiations with the Russians by ending the war in a way that satisfies everyone, even for a limited period of time. As happened in 1991 in Desert Storm in Iraq, after the American Seventh Offensive Army was ambushed by the tight bag of death, which neutralized more than 500 American tanks, armored vehicles, and other vehicles, and was carried out by two armored divisions and one mechanized division of the Iraqi General Republican Guard.
As for the failure of the Ukrainian attack, its result here is either that Ukraine acquiesces to Russian dictates at the diplomatic negotiating table, or opens the way for Russian forces to proceed with the occupation of all Ukrainian lands, or at least eastern Ukraine until Kiev, due to the collapse of the Ukrainian professional combat formations, unless the NATO forces intervene in direct confrontation with the Russians and at the forefront of these formations are the Polish forces, but this might be rules out from happening for several reasons, including that It will end up killing everyone.
And in the event that the miracle happens and the Russian forces were completely defeated, then a nuclear war would also become inevitable!
Therefore, the middle case is the partial defeat of the Russians, if the Russians enable them to do so! It is the perfect solution and the biggest victory for NATO in this war, with the United States of America at the forefront.
Source: An Opinion..
At the end of the Soviet era, the offensive general mobilization army designed to storm NATO's western territory was equipped with more than three times the number of tanks equipped by the general Russian forces at the current stage!
To carry out a deep penetration of the western fronts, with the idea of landing more than a third of these tanks in a parachute manner, in order to form the offensive thunderbolt shock.
Therefore, NATO thought, since then, of a way to stop this terrible quantitative advance of the Soviet forces towards European soil, without quickly entering into a nuclear war, or even resorting to tactical nuclear and neutron bombs!
Therefore, they hastened to develop several military, tactical and armament scenarios, to defeat these Soviet attacks by making the cities impregnable urban fortresses, which we witnessed against the Russians in the Battle of Kiev in this war in its initial stage, as well as the use of tactical distance weapons with super-artificial sub-munitions that target Russian shields from their weak points. Basically, to neutralize the Russian strengths, and it seems that it had a secret or undeclared use in the war to restore Kharkiv during its recovery from Russian hands, and in 2003 it was tested in Iraq in an air way against armored and mechanical groupings of the Iraqi public and private Republican Guard.
Today, after the NATO leadership failed to drag the Russians into the offensive winter war, it seems that they resorted to the Ukrainian offensive spring or summer war, to drag the Russians to the same first scheme, but this time in a short manner, as a defensive reaction in a counter-defensive way.
The basic idea of this attack is to renew the experience of restoring the Ukrainians’ experience of what the Russians robbed by force of the Kharkiv region or province from the hands of the Ukrainian forces, but in a larger, wider and more mobilizing way for the forces and equipment that the Ukrainian offensive forces will have, after neutralizing most of the Russian armored vehicles in a spaced manner with missiles with counter smart sub.-munitions.
But what is new is that Russia today has a greater number of specialized defense forces than before, with multiple defensive and offensive tasks, with unprecedented crowds and equipment in terms of modernity and technical capabilities, with the development of negative misleading concealment and masking principles, and the development of positive countermeasures to electronic jamming and disinformation, in addition to layers of protection. Anti-all-air missile.
In the Kharkiv province, the Russians were mobilizing a quarter of the forces that Russia is mobilizing today in each of its current provinces, and it withdrew before the Ukrainian attack from Kharkiv the strength of a reinforced combat division to support the Kherson province before the start of the major Ukrainian offensive that could have extended to Luhansk province belonging to the Donbass region, had it not been for the entry of the first defensive reserve army, which was within the border areas, to become an impenetrable barrier to the large Ukrainian offensive extension at that time.
This success was the beginning of the idea of partial reserve mobilization, which today consists of five defensive armies, in addition to five offensive armies, to raise the Russian build-up in Ukraine from 115,000 to more than 600,000, with the presence of secret multi-role reserve forces estimated at 200,000 warriors in the Donbass region.
Will the Ukrainian forces, led by NATO, be able, in such complex circumstances, to make the attack a successful for the second time?!
The truth is that the previous victory of the Ukrainians in Kharkiv was not primarily caused by the large successive Ukrainian crowds attacking the Russian defensive fronts, but rather the secret was in neutralizing the equipment of the heavy reserve forces of the Russian counterattack, which Ukraine often showered their shields with intelligent seeking skeet dishes carried by the double-range GMRS missiles ER up to a range of 160 km, that target the upper parts of the Russian shields. In which the missile in addition to the possibility of the Germans experimenting with a loitering mobile missile that separates from the German Mars missiles parallel to the American tracked MLRS launchers, and this resulted in the absence of counterattacks to support and strengthen the Russian first lines of defense, and this tactic was able to silent most of the Russian long range support fire, which led to the rapid collapse of these first defensive bulwarks.
Will Ukraine repeat this scenario with the help of NATO against the current defense lines that are more fortified and defensive in depth?!
Of course, this is if Russia adheres to defensive positions against the new Ukrainian attack, but the Russians have introduced 1,800 modern tanks to the front, including more than 800 revolutionary T-90M Borrev (breakthrough) tanks and more than 100 future T-14 Armata tanks, which are advanced offensive tanks, and I think Russia will choose this time the middle case, that is, the active defense that will combine defense and attack, but the near attack in order to rearrange the defensive positions.
Hence, we see that the CIA does not question and doubt the success of the Ukrainian attack on the Russian fronts for three reasons, according to this security apparatus. The first, in brief, is the depth and strength of the Russian defenses, and the second is the growing Russian ability to constantly monitor and reconnaissance by means of air in the first place, especially with drones, then satellites, and finally the ground. The third is the quantitative and qualitative air superiority and the increase in the aircraft’s use of smart spacer munitions, including glide bombs, to make them immune from the danger of air defenses as well as those smart missile and glide munitions.
This talk is not propaganda, but rather an accurate description of the state of superiority on the Russian front, especially since the Russian Minister of Defense declared the superiority of the Russian forces in terms of quality, armament and number, and the prospects for unlimited logistical support, compared to the previous initial conditions.
Hence, it is worth asking now, as long as the Ukrainian attack will be a loser by a large percentage, then why would NATO risk this losing adventure?!
To answer that, we say that it will most likely increase its reliance on the shock weapon, which defeats the Russian armored vehicles.
But with means launched from the depths to escape the clutches of Russian counter-air strikes, and I mean from the American HIMARS launchers up to a range of 150 km on the principle of hit and run, after firing missiles that extend the range of small diameter bombs, of which 6 missiles are likely to be fired, and aircraft are also likely to participate. The American Thunderbolt A-10 that America offered before to Ukraine, but not for the remote missions by firing 12 small diameter bombs for a range exceeding 100 km, as is the case in the current conditions, and this bomb, the SDB small diameter bomb with its multiple launch modes, will target fixed and mobile selective targets. The skeet dishes that branch out from the BLU-108B Avcosic bacillus must be launched from the American ATACMS missiles that can be launched from the American HIMARS launchers up to a range of 300 km and at an ultrasonic speed to deploy 24 Avcosict bacillus, but for these missiles there is a Russian-American agreement that they will not enter the Ukrainian war .
Therefore, it seems that the US is carrying out the hybrid operation, and re-manufacturing the Ukrainian Grom 2 tactical missiles to become the content of the American ATACMS missiles in terms of range, speed (Mach 3) and warhead weight (1000 kg), and what is most likely is the leaks stated by the "Military Watch" magazine Where the US military reported that the Russians were able to strike stores of Grom-2 missiles and their launchers inside Ukrainian territory.
Therefore, we find Russia trying to thwart or discourage the attack in a proactive and preventive manner by targeting the basic elements of the attack components according to the documented intelligence information in a visual way, and it is deploying field tracked anti-aircraft platforms, either of the technically and programmatically updated Tor missile, to deal even with 155 mm smart artillery and on tracked vehicles shells. Tunguska hybrid missile artillery with combat towers similar to the towers of the central Pantsir system, and despite the success of the Russians in shooting down the Grom-2 missile and even small-diameter bombs, this will not work if the Ukrainians follow the flooding method, so Russia often may cancel the limited counter-attacks and replace that with starting to use the super destructive weapon, which is the strategic alternative to tactical nuclear bombs, under the pretext of escalation as a reaction against the Kremlin's kamikaze drone attack by Ukraine!
Although the US National Intelligence Director confirmed that Russia would not use a tactical nuclear weapon in response to the Kremlin's strike, she did not indicate the negative effects of the destructive alternatives to the Russian tactical nukes.
The useful conclusion is that the desired strategy for the Ukrainian spring offensive lies in neutralizing the positions of Russian power with American smart munitions, in a way of massive bursts, changing the balance of combat superiority in favor of the Ukrainians, while securing appropriate defensive coverage against Russian air threats.
In the end, the Ukrainian attack may not result in a crushing defeat for the Russians, but perhaps a partial defeat. However, with this partial achievement, Ukraine may have gained a positive trump card, facilitating diplomatic negotiations with the Russians by ending the war in a way that satisfies everyone, even for a limited period of time. As happened in 1991 in Desert Storm in Iraq, after the American Seventh Offensive Army was ambushed by the tight bag of death, which neutralized more than 500 American tanks, armored vehicles, and other vehicles, and was carried out by two armored divisions and one mechanized division of the Iraqi General Republican Guard.
As for the failure of the Ukrainian attack, its result here is either that Ukraine acquiesces to Russian dictates at the diplomatic negotiating table, or opens the way for Russian forces to proceed with the occupation of all Ukrainian lands, or at least eastern Ukraine until Kiev, due to the collapse of the Ukrainian professional combat formations, unless the NATO forces intervene in direct confrontation with the Russians and at the forefront of these formations are the Polish forces, but this might be rules out from happening for several reasons, including that It will end up killing everyone.
And in the event that the miracle happens and the Russian forces were completely defeated, then a nuclear war would also become inevitable!
Therefore, the middle case is the partial defeat of the Russians, if the Russians enable them to do so! It is the perfect solution and the biggest victory for NATO in this war, with the United States of America at the forefront.
Source: An Opinion..
