You are operating on pure conjecture ascribing intentions to Russia which it never stated that it had and which its operations do not indicate with anywhere near the kind of certainty you claim to have that “it is relatively clear they wanted to surround Kiev”.
Again this idea of complete encirclement goes contrary to the objectives of the operation. Not only would it require more forces being dedicated to maintaining such an encirclement than Russia actually deployed there, but it would have been counterproductive to two of the main goals of the semi-surround that they deployed: one being to keep a corridor open for civilians to evacuate west, the other being to allow more Ukrainian forces from elsewhere to be drawn into the city as they would feel compelled to reinforce it due to their capital being under threat. This serves to draw away more forces from other fronts and prevents reinforcements from going east where Russia’s main objectives are located.
It is not Russia that said they were going to remain entrenched around Kiev, by your own admission it was western commentators/analysts. Russia announced that they would be redeploying and they have done just that. How is this “losing”?
You act as if the Russian military is comically incompetent, unable to plan for eventualities or to account for the enemy’s possible moves, unable to assess either its own or the enemy’s strength accurately. Yet we know for a fact that Russia has excellent intelligence on virtually the entirety of Ukraine, it has been able to conduct targeted strikes on all sorts of military objectives deep inside Ukrainian territory all the way to the far west. Why then do you think they would make such amateurish mistakes as you are ascribing to them? You have been consuming far too much western propaganda surrounding this conflict.
Not only would it require more forces being dedicated to maintaining such an encirclement than Russia actually deployed there
3 of Russia’s largest forces were deployed there, 2 from north and 1 from east, along with majority of their air power in fighter jets, drones, and helicopters.
to keep a corridor open for civilians to evacuate west
can be done while city is surrounded, look at Mariupol
to allow more Ukrainian forces from elsewhere to be drawn into the city as they would feel compelled to reinforce it due to their capital being under threat.
They don’t need to have open access to the city center to be drawn to it.
It is not Russia that said they were going to remain entrenched around Kiev, by your own admission it was western commentators/analysts.
We have satellite pictures, drone footage, and amateur videos showing this was the case. Not just some random analyst’s words taken on pure good faith. Your only evidence for Russia not being entrenched is just “Russia didn’t say it” as if they’re going to publicly acknowledge every little detail of their plans.
You act as if the Russian military is comically incompetent
I did not. I only said they underestimated the severity of their logistics issues. This is not “comically incompetent”. On the other hand you’re trying to present them as fantastically flawless, having made zero mistakes and faced zero setbacks.
You are operating on pure conjecture ascribing intentions to Russia which it never stated that it had and which its operations do not indicate with anywhere near the kind of certainty you claim to have that “it is relatively clear they wanted to surround Kiev”.
Again this idea of complete encirclement goes contrary to the objectives of the operation. Not only would it require more forces being dedicated to maintaining such an encirclement than Russia actually deployed there, but it would have been counterproductive to two of the main goals of the semi-surround that they deployed: one being to keep a corridor open for civilians to evacuate west, the other being to allow more Ukrainian forces from elsewhere to be drawn into the city as they would feel compelled to reinforce it due to their capital being under threat. This serves to draw away more forces from other fronts and prevents reinforcements from going east where Russia’s main objectives are located.
It is not Russia that said they were going to remain entrenched around Kiev, by your own admission it was western commentators/analysts. Russia announced that they would be redeploying and they have done just that. How is this “losing”?
You act as if the Russian military is comically incompetent, unable to plan for eventualities or to account for the enemy’s possible moves, unable to assess either its own or the enemy’s strength accurately. Yet we know for a fact that Russia has excellent intelligence on virtually the entirety of Ukraine, it has been able to conduct targeted strikes on all sorts of military objectives deep inside Ukrainian territory all the way to the far west. Why then do you think they would make such amateurish mistakes as you are ascribing to them? You have been consuming far too much western propaganda surrounding this conflict.
3 of Russia’s largest forces were deployed there, 2 from north and 1 from east, along with majority of their air power in fighter jets, drones, and helicopters.
can be done while city is surrounded, look at Mariupol
They don’t need to have open access to the city center to be drawn to it.
We have satellite pictures, drone footage, and amateur videos showing this was the case. Not just some random analyst’s words taken on pure good faith. Your only evidence for Russia not being entrenched is just “Russia didn’t say it” as if they’re going to publicly acknowledge every little detail of their plans.
I did not. I only said they underestimated the severity of their logistics issues. This is not “comically incompetent”. On the other hand you’re trying to present them as fantastically flawless, having made zero mistakes and faced zero setbacks.