> There may be a lesson for nato. Russia’s initial failure to gain air superiority could be explained away by the Kremlin’s secrecy over the decision to go to war and a lack of planning time, says Mr Bronk. But in his view, the air force’s passivity could also reflect inexperience or incompetence.
Where is the line between "objectively assessing an enemy's weaknesses" and "blatant wishfull thinking" ?
While we're discussing how bad the russian air force is doing, cities are being bombed constantly, and the ukrainian governement is imploring for a no-fly zone that no one will enforce given it would mean engaging with, guess what, the air force. Oh, and starting a nuclear war at the same time.
Maybe it's an operationnal failure on Russian's side - but if so, they carved themselves a situation where they can't really _lose_, even if they can't win quickly.
Hopefully something will change the game - but I doubt "hoping for the other side to secretly be stupid" will cut it.
Where is the line between "objectively assessing an enemy's weaknesses" and "blatant wishfull thinking" ?
While we're discussing how bad the russian air force is doing, cities are being bombed constantly, and the ukrainian governement is imploring for a no-fly zone that no one will enforce given it would mean engaging with, guess what, the air force. Oh, and starting a nuclear war at the same time.
Maybe it's an operationnal failure on Russian's side - but if so, they carved themselves a situation where they can't really _lose_, even if they can't win quickly.
Hopefully something will change the game - but I doubt "hoping for the other side to secretly be stupid" will cut it.