07-01-2023, 06:46 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/angered-count...27247.html
Nothing "new" here but the article does set out (correctly IMHO) the limitations of the current weaponry Ukraine has available. Indeed the NATO combined arms doctrine has always assumed at least local command of the air and the existence of at least locally effective SEAD/DEAD plans. The thing I find both annoying and scary is that Ukraine seems to always approach getting it's weaponry one category at a time. For quite a while tanks and APCs were the requirement. They got those. Now they are saying "well, obviously we need F-16s". They are right, but that was true 6 months ago as well. Both Ukraine and NATO seem to be proceeding without much of a plan. I understand there is politics involved here, but it doesn't give one confidence that anybody involved actually knows what they are doing :-).
Ukraine appears to be making rock soup. That shouldn't be necessary when they are defending NATO against Russia. If NATO is going to "help", both sides need to have a realistic and common understanding of what will be required and when it will be required. Yes, the enemy gets a vote and will do things that mess up the plan. That is bad enough, but having a "plan" that isn't common and more of a "happening" is a recipe for failure.
Nothing "new" here but the article does set out (correctly IMHO) the limitations of the current weaponry Ukraine has available. Indeed the NATO combined arms doctrine has always assumed at least local command of the air and the existence of at least locally effective SEAD/DEAD plans. The thing I find both annoying and scary is that Ukraine seems to always approach getting it's weaponry one category at a time. For quite a while tanks and APCs were the requirement. They got those. Now they are saying "well, obviously we need F-16s". They are right, but that was true 6 months ago as well. Both Ukraine and NATO seem to be proceeding without much of a plan. I understand there is politics involved here, but it doesn't give one confidence that anybody involved actually knows what they are doing :-).
Ukraine appears to be making rock soup. That shouldn't be necessary when they are defending NATO against Russia. If NATO is going to "help", both sides need to have a realistic and common understanding of what will be required and when it will be required. Yes, the enemy gets a vote and will do things that mess up the plan. That is bad enough, but having a "plan" that isn't common and more of a "happening" is a recipe for failure.