Of course both sides use propaganda. If I see a clip of one more Ukrainian soldier rescuing a cat or dog ..... well anyway, it is usually pretty obvious.
You are correct, to a degree, with respect to HIMARS. Though I believe you are drawing the wrong conclusion. The Multiple Launch Rocket System is forty-year-old technology. HIMARS is merely the same launcher mounted on a truck. Hardly what I would call cutting edge by our standards. The GLMRS rockets are a bit newer but still dating to the late 90's. The thing that Russia might soberly consider is the effect this multi-decade old technology, in very limited quantities, is having on the battlefield. Yes, I know Russia claims to have destroyed another two or three almost daily. You can believe this or not, but I have carefully looked at every clip released by your MOD claiming a HIMARS kill, and I have yet to see a photo or video clip of an actual system in the photo or video - much less one being struck. I would simply note somehow, those ammunition depots keep detonating along with the odd command post and surface to air missile site.
The Ukrainian Army - not NATO and not the US has fought the Russian Army to a standstill. That Army has inflicted grievous losses to Russia's best formations and destroyed a large portion of Russia's modernized armor. Battle Damage Assessments are now beginning to include T-62 tanks of all things! Yes, Russia too has killed many Ukrainians - soldiers and civilians. But that nation's willingness to willingly bear those costs and sacrifices should be a message to Russia as well.
I will simply note once more, that after five months of war, Russia is unable to gain air superiority, it is unable to dominate the Black Sea, and its army was forced to withdraw from Kiev and the northern axes of advance after suffering devastating casualties (particularly the VDV and logistics troops). It is being fought to a standstill in the East and the South. Russia's long range strike missile inventory has had no meaningful effect on Ukraine's ability to wage war and much of it now expended. Politically, rather than causing a crisis in NATO, the alliance will now add Finland and Sweden. Finally, economically, the hard work of two generations of Russia's best and brightest is being destroyed. Many of those skilled engineers and entrepreneurs are leaving the country. Unintended consequences can be every bit as telling as actual objectives in conducting a special military operation. These are truths that the US has learned to its great cost too often over the last fifty years.
The Ukrainian assessments of casualties inflicted are obviously inflated. However, the latest US/UK conservative assessment is that during these five months, the Russian Army and its auxiliaries such as Wagner have suffered 60,000 casualties with 15,000 killed in action. If accurate, these, at least by our standards, are staggering casualty rates. Perhaps because so few of these young men are recruited from the areas around St. Petersburg and Moscow these losses remain largely invisible to most of the Russian population that matters politically?
One other cautionary point. Imagine if the opponent was instead just a single US Corps built around a couple of divisions, an Armored Cavalry Regiment, and the equivalent of four brigades of artillery containing a total of 126 of these launchers and vast supplies of both GMLRS and ATACMS rockets. I would also add the additional 144 155mm self-propelled guns would have large inventories of GPS guided munitions. All of those platforms have the ability to instantly self-lay, fire and immediately move. Those two divisions would also include two aviation brigades with Apaches. In turn, all of that would be operating under an umbrella of true generation V fighters and attack aircraft. Each of the armor brigades in those divisions (seven in all counting the ACR) would field around 120 M1 Abrams tanks with target acquisition and lethal range engagement far beyond anything but perhaps the T-14 - should it actually do what its builders claim it will. And Russia has how many of those? I would urge you to check with some of your informed armor colleagues to see how confident they are at cracking an Abrams's armor with whatever modernized T-72's and T-80's are left. Also, that Corps, each of those divisions and every brigade and battalion would be led by men with combat experience and knowledge of the art of combined operations.
All of that is why Sergey Lavrov's blustering about moving against NATO and Poland is far more amusing than worrying to the West's military leadership.
Finally, Russia will take a generation, likely more, to atone for the barbarism it has exposed in its use of missile and artillery fires against civilians and civilian infrastructure. The behavior of Russia's soldiers in occupied areas is reminiscent of the Red Army's behavior as it overran the Eastern half of Germany in '45. Yes, Ukraine has exploited these incidents for propaganda purposes, but the Russian military has provided them far too much material to exploit. It is also true that the US caused collateral damage in its various campaigns over the last two decades. But those incidents were noteworthy because of their relative rarity. For Russia, on the other hand, it seems to be at the heart of the Russian way of war.
You obviously have full access to the Western internet. Assuming that your appearances here are not merely to peddle the latest Russian talking points and propaganda, I would urge you to avail yourself to that access. You are obviously an intelligent, educated observer. Study everything you find on the war with a critical eye - both sides. I do. The conclusions above are based upon that open source analysis. Of course I have biases. But the conclusions I am drawing are the results of what I see - not what I believe. What I see is an army in trouble.
www.dailymail.co.uk
