HIMARS and other high tech rear launched weapons have proven incredibly useful against Russia. Ukraine just doesn’t have the supply they need to utilize them.
27
Shot-Toe-28846 days ago
+23
Because drones alone won’t stop a mechanized advance on Moscow with tanks and traditional equipment that is still needed for land offensives.
Moscow would love to be able to seize more land with blitzkrieg tank tactics and special operations with air assets, they just don’t have that capability right now.
Most war strategists still insist that tanks are just as important on the battlefield as ever. Tales of the tank’s demise have been greatly exaggerated. Now you need both: tanks and drones.
23
Shaengar6 days ago
+4
Umm isn't that exactly what drones are good at? Stopping a mechanised advance
4
noir_lord6 days ago
+10
It’s more how Russia does combined arms (or not as the case may be).
It’s been known for a long time that sending armour out without infantry is a death sentence to the armour and vice versa.
You need tanks/armour to deal with other tanks/fixed positions and infantry to protect the tanks from other infantry.
Russian forces by and large don’t have the training (even at the start and doubly so now) to pull that off so they either send infantry or tanks on their own and they get blasted by drones.
Drones are a threat and yeah there will be some adaptation needed by western military doctrine but they aren’t a wonder weapon and both sides use them because they don’t have alternatives.
The Tank has been around for over a hundred years and it’s demise has been reputed a few times but there is always a place for “f****** big mobile gun that can take a hit” on the battlefield *if it’s used appropriately*.
If you know your opponent is fielding a lot of drones, you don’t fight in a way that plays straight into that basically.
10
dbxp6 days ago
-1
Armour and infantry have been integrated for decades in the Russian army in the form of motor rifle brigades. A bunch of BMPs with T72s for support
-1
Hosenkobold6 days ago
+4
Only if you don't have precision anti-air. The german Skyranger for example. Or laser. Israel is already using them to get rid of those garbage rockets from Hamas.
4
Dildomar6 days ago
+8
think of war as a very complicated game of rock-paper-scissors. for every "rock "that the aggressor may throw, the defender must have a weapon that is the equivalent of "paper". if you run out of paper, the enemy is just going to start lobbing rocks and you are done. every time they use scissors, you must also have something that is a rock and so on. russia has depleted a lot of their rocks against ukraine (because ukraine has a lot of paper and russia just keeps throwing rocks like dumbasses), and they are going to run out at some point if they keep it up. however, they still have enough rocks, not to mention scissors and paper, to throw against latvia.
8
the_pewpew_kid6 days ago
+2
Because occupying territory still requires men
2
Easy_Contest_81056 days ago
+2
Russia could still mobilize about 2M troops to invade and occupy a small country like Latvia and other countries like Lithuania and Estonia. With no tanks, APCs air support it would be short lived occupation.
2
Bon101UK6 days ago
+1
I question the figure of 2m. They have a standing army of 1.2, which they intend to increase to 1.5 by end of 2026.
If they had 2m on the nose, they wouldn't send their entire armed forces, what with so many borders they share.
Between 2027 and 29. A 'window of opportunity' has been identified. When Ukraine might subside and before the EU ramps up. Even then, it will most likely be hybrid warfare rather than full mobilisation.
1
Easy_Contest_81056 days ago
+1
A general mobilization could get them an ass army of about 2M. That could still be a very large meat wave that could march into a small country. But what is the end game? I think Putin is relying on a bigger conflict like US vs China then he can basically do whatever he wants under the radar.
1
Bon101UK6 days ago
Indeed, sowing chaos is his tool to get what he wants, which links to the hybrid warfare. I agree he will create division to stimulate a conflict between the two great super powers.
Sun Tzu, divide an conquer. He wont need a large army if the countries are divided enough, or best case scenario for him; infighting.
0
Werftflammen6 days ago
+1
You can't hold territory with drones
1
dbxp6 days ago
+1
They are building modern capabilities too however future conflicts will not necessarily play out the same as Ukraine. Ukraine is fighting on a stagnant front boxed in by mines and saturated with AA. If you've got say Finland's extremely long sparsely populated border to play with the conflict would look very different. In a war with NATO all of Russia's Western ports are instantly surrounded and St Petersburg & Murmansk are threatened.
1
queen-adreena6 days ago
+18
Tonight? But I'm already in my pyjamas!
18
Consistent-Metal94276 days ago
+2
They only sent a few drones while you slept. He's right about russia as usual.
2
Hopeful_Leg_62006 days ago
+1
Whats that?
War were delcared
1
bier00t5 days ago
+1
big countries dont bother to declare war. they just attack
1
Hopeful_Leg_62005 days ago
+1
I assumed pyjamas line was futurama refference so I replied with one
1
Nerevarine916 days ago
+5
Tonight, tomorrow night, and any other night.
5
Traditional_Cry80755 days ago
+2
TBF Europe/NATO should always be ready to fight Russia. Every, single, day.
2
bier00t5 days ago
like that was 80% purpose of NATO - to defend west from ruSSia. as most other countries are more reliable
0
AndrewWhite97May 6, 2026
-10
Well they cant defeat a country that had a piss poor military before they invaded so what them think they can defeat nato.
-10
Manach_Irish6 days ago
+17
TBF, many aspects of the Ukranian miliatary were signficiantly overhauled in the wake of the 2014 seizure of Crimea due to NATO trainers. Their army shown, as noted by numerous books on the 2022 invasion, a marked professionalism.
17
st_Paulus6 days ago
-4
> due to NATO trainers
99% active NATO personnel never participated in any real conflicts. Most of those who did never participated in a full scale wars - with artillery, aviation and tanks on the other side.
Firearms discipline and first aid aside - I can hardly imagine these people providing any meaningful insights.
-4
PretendDebt6 days ago
-1
NATO's military doctrine is pretty much just "bomb everything into oblivion with air force". It works especially well against underdeveloped countries that can hardly fight back:D
-1
st_Paulus6 days ago
I mean - yeah, it's massively useful when the enemy can't shoot you back. NATO navy and air force instructors would be extremely useful without a doubt - there are serving *the* best specialists in the world. Too bad there's no equivalent air force and navy in Ukraine.
When most of your ground troops' combat experience comes from knowing someone hit by an IED and the rest are glorified airsoft fans essentially - they can hardly teach anything useful.
The notion that "NATO trainers" somehow fixed Ukrainian army is borderline insulting IMO. War is very physical and full of minute details - when and where to duck/cover, where/when you put your artillery so it won't be turned into dust a couple of minutes after arrival and so on. No amount of TV kung fu and theory can help with that.
0
harmless_gecko6 days ago
+1
If they try anything then they will try it in a way that they hope won't get all of NATO involved.
1
DDoubleDDog6 days ago
-45
Europe is too busy trying to save Russia's ally, the Islamic Republic of Iran. They don't have time to defend Europe.
-45
noir_lord6 days ago
+25
Oh look, a 9 day old account with a hot take.
Yes, that is what all of Europe is doing right now, funnelling arms into Iran so they can keep the straight closed, how obvious!
31 Comments