I agree with most of your points, but feel compelled to point out that much of this is theoretical for NATO. The Alliance has never fought an peer enemy, and it has little prospects to do it. Ukrainians lack some of the building blocks of NATO strategy, such as the air force you pointed out. Furthermore, there is nowhere to maneuver - its extremely static. It's much more WW1 than Iraq

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, NATO tactics haven't been proven against a peer enemy, but I would argue neither did the Soviet tactics, this war can hardly be seen as a show of force over a "peer enemy". And NATO advisors saying "if there is a minefield, go around it" if they are continuous for many miles is naive to say the least. But my armchair general spidy sense tells me the static nature of the battlefield and allowing the creation of these minefields are both a consequence of Soviet tactics, not the other way around.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is completely fair. I also hope you are right since that means more training will be the key to victory

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Слава Україні Brother