Hacker News Reader

Comment by javier2 | Hacker News Reader

Same.

While it is still a bit unclear to me at least why Russia sent their seemingly old gear without proper support and young conscripts in first, the terrible parachute attempts still stand out.

When you want it to be over quickly, you have to send in the best soldiers with the best gear first to seal the deal?

In addition to live NATO intelligence, it is clear to most europeans that US intelligence tried to warn about this at the start of December, with photos showing large preparations for heavy army movement all around the Ukrainian border.

View on HN

Seems like it is the same as the Soviet days: Russia is just an empty shell.

I recently learned their economy is as big as the Benelux. What a joke for a "world power".

Their elite spetsnaz got captured, the elite chechenians got annihilated before they could move a finger. No supplies, soldiers are uninformed, ... .

5 days of war, no major city captured, no air control, no cut in communications, electricity, ... .

They got nukes, yes, it seems that's basically all. If they are as good as the rest, they might even explode before they leave the surface ;).

Considering how fast things fell in place within the EU and NATO, those warnings (I doubt it was only the US) weren't in vain.

Why send not the best, brightest and most advanced? Because you only jump as high as you need. And using your most sophisticated gear in an area that is most likely covered NATO detection gear and consultants / advisors doesn't sound to smart neither.

Disagree. Shock and awe. Remember that this also should have served as showcase of their military tech for arms sales to the world. Only the fact that they used up all their guided missiles in the first two days without achieving anything (resorting to ballistic missiles by the third) shows how in fact it was always smoke and mirrors.

Tell me one war where shock and awe really worked. If used against a foe that wasn't totally outclassed in every imaginable way.

2014 Crimea annexation

And the war exactly ended since then? Because it seems Ukraine and Russia were in low scale war up to, ehat, two days ago?

> While it is still a bit unclear to me at least why Russia sent their seemingly old gear without proper support and young conscripts in first

To use them as cannon fodder to see what military capabilites Ukraine has been given by the West?

Yeah. Russians aren't stupid to send most of their punch in the beginning. Russian actions are perhaps of lower success than expected, but strategically they are correct. First there has to be the phase of measurement and taking out the most dangerous elements, preparing ground for the majority of troups. When roads are safe, the real invasion will come in.

> seemingly old gear

1.Russia doesn't have much new gear and 2. the old at least works reliably in the field. Russia for example backed down from gas turbines in tanks (like T-80) because of poor reliability and high maintenance (and maintenance is always a huge issue in Russia)

> without proper support

that is the best Russia can. Support and logistics has always been an issue.

> and young conscripts in first

the young people grew during Putin's Russia and they are much easy to make them kill Ukrainians.

> you have to send in the best soldiers with the best gear first to seal the deal

that were the ones who were dropped on the airfields near Kiev in order to capture them and thus facilitate coming of the next wave of the best - the Pskov's 76th paratroopers - who were to flew in. The capture of any of the airfields failed.

The ground attack, even by the best of the best, was too slow to make to Kiev for the "Czechoslovakia 68" plan to work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com