It’s been a long time since I’ve cited Bill Roggio—since the very earliest days of this blog, I think. He has a piece in the Daily Mail that’s worth reading. Here’s a snippet:
Wishful thinking has the upper hand in the battle to shape Western perceptions of the war in Ukraine.
Sympathy for the outnumbered and outgunned defenders of Kyiv has led to the exaggeration of Russian setbacks, misunderstanding of Russian strategy, and even baseless claims from amateur psychoanalysts that Putin has lost his mind.
A more sober analysis shows that Russia may have sought a knockout blow, but always had well-laid plans for follow-on assaults if its initial moves proved insufficient.
The world has underestimated Putin before and those mistakes have led, in part, to this tragedy in Ukraine.
We must be clear-eyed now that the war is underway.
Yet even the professionals at the Pentagon are letting sympathy cloud their judgement.
Just two days into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, U.S. Department of Defense briefers were quick to claim that failing to take Kyiv in the opening days of the war amounted to a serious setback.
DoD briefers implied that Russia’s offensive was well behind schedule or had even failed because the capital had not fallen.
But U.S. leaders should have learned to restrain their hopes after their catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Once again, U.S. and Western officials are falling into the trap of failing to understand the enemy and his objectives.
Read the whole thing. This tallies pretty closely with my laments about being deluged with propaganda. Maybe I missed it in his piece but open source intelligence strongly suggests that the Russians are about to encircle the Ukrainian troops in eastern Ukraine. They are likely to become unavailable for the duration.
The TL;DR version is that the Russian invasion is not failing.
He concludes:
Believing Russia’s assault is going poorly may make us feel better but is at odds with the facts.
We cannot help Ukraine if we cannot be honest about its predicament.
To quote Sun Tzu “If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” My greatest concern is that self-delusion will lead to hasty, ill-considered reactions.
Maybe its a cultural issue.
The American way of waging war is popularly known as “shock and awe”.
The German way of waging war is colloquially referred to as “blitzkrieg”.
What’s the Russian way of waging war — certainly there is no English phrase or word for it. I wonder how many experts in the West are deeply knowledgeable about it?
In one of the articles I’ve read recently, the author summarizes it that when we kill civilians it’s a mistake but when the Russians kill civilians it’s deliberate. I think that in both cases the importance of the attack outweighs the importance of avoiding “collateral damage”.
Did we shell residential areas in Iraq? Dont remember doing that. Did we do anything like what Russians did in Grozny? Anyway, we also bomb way too willingly. Even if we try to avoid civilians we always hit some. Our poor intel in Afghanistan lead to bombing innocents many times.
Agree there is too much propaganda to sort through, but my sense is that if Russia was trying to portray this as their coming in to rescue ethnic Russians/Slavs and Ukarinians wanted to be rescued then that has failed. I think they still win as they step up the killings and become less discriminating in their targets. No idea if Ukraine maintains a counterinsurgency after that. History suggests they might.
Steve
We bombed a residential area in Baghdad. We bombed residential areas in Fallujah. Many, many drone strikes killed civilians.
I also think that arming civilians in Ukraine was an error. Irregulars are legitimate targets but it’s not a legitimate war.
That’s pretty much what I think will happen.
“I think that in both cases the importance of the attack outweighs the importance of avoiding “collateral damageâ€.”
That would be a Bingo.
“…my sense is that if Russia was trying to portray this as their coming in to rescue ethnic Russians/Slavs and [Ukrainians] wanted to be rescued then that has failed. I think they still win as they step up the killings and become less discriminating in their targets.
Failed, indeed. And yes, its obvious its full animal mode. As I have said, Putin isn’t going to let this take him down. No chance.
“I also think that arming civilians in Ukraine was an error.”
Perhaps technically, but easy to say from the comfort of your easy chair. These people are defending their country and way of life, and have balls. They are not sheep. Next step: house to house fighting.
Agree with Drew on arming the civilians. Does it have long term fallout? Maybe, but if you die now you dont live to see the later problems. I also think there could be a positive aspect. As I think you know the Swiss get to keep their guns (buy them) after military service. Do the same thing in Ukraine along with regular training, which I think the Swiss do. Since you are going to have lots of guns around teach the kids to shoot like the Swiss do. (At the risk of bragging our high school team won the state rifle championship this year. My partner, lives across the street, has a kid on the team. I donated some ammunition to the cause.)
Steve
My high school’s teams were national rifle champion from 1959-1964 and several years thereafter, state champions for decades. There is a firing range in the school’s basement. Learning to shoot was practically a requirement for graduation. Every incoming freshman was offered instruction at no charge (you could decline if you didn’t care to) and could try out for the freshman rifle team.
My concern about arming civilians was not about long-range consequences but immediate ones. Hypothetical scenario: you are an officer leading a company. Your troops are taking fire from an apartment building. Should they return fire? Should you call in an air strike? Would that be a war crime?