disastrous campaign in the first phase. they took a lot of casualties, they fought badly, they have been badly commanded, they have lost nearly a dozen generals to snipers, they have failed to use effectively what is called combined arms tactics, combining artillery with infantry, with tanks. their logistics have been dreadful, but by sheer weight of numbers and especially the enormous firepower of artillery that russia relies heavily on, notjust artillery but cruise missiles, precision guided missiles, etc, they have made some military gains in ukraine. i think it would be wrong to deny that. does gains in ukraine. i think it would be wrong to deny that. gains in ukraine. i think it would be wrong to deny that. does he still had the confidence be wrong to deny that. does he still had the confidence of be wrong to deny that. does he still had the confidence of his be wrong to deny that. does he still had the confidence of his generals? j had the confidence of his generals? well,
significant difference at a tactical level. but i would put a cautionary note on this. the evidence from the images and reports of the fighting suggests that the russian forces are not very effective in doing combined arms tactics. if they can become more effective at combined armed tactics, which involves synchronising tanks, infantry, engineers and artillery, they could make it much more difficult for the ukrainian defenders to use these anti tank weapons. ukrainian defenders to use these anti-tank weapons. ukrainian defenders to use these anti-tank weapons. there have been some assessments anti-tank weapons. there have been some assessments from anti-tank weapons. there have been some assessments from m - anti-tank weapons. there have been | some assessments from m dutchman from military commentators, that on all fronts to some extent, russian forces have stalled, whether it is because they have got cheap tires that can t cope with the terrain more or whether troops have just d