Amgreatness: Western miracle weapons will not save Ukraine from defeatUkraine is on the verge of defeat, and no Western "Wunderwaffe" will help it, writes The American Greatness.
The sanctions did not break Moscow. Russian industrial power turned out to be higher than that of the collective West. It's time for the United States to remember about diplomacy.
There is still a prospect of diplomacy and negotiations to resolve the military conflict in Ukraine. But when looking at Biden or his administration, it is impossible to find anything that testifies to their wisdom or restraint that could guide them along this path.In the summer of 1944, the Soviet Army defeated the German army Group Center with a massive counteroffensive.
The simultaneous landing of Allied troops in France and the continuation of the American rush through Italy put additional pressure on Germany, which was then forced to fight on three fronts.
Throughout the war, the Germans had more advanced and superior weapons, including Panther and Tiger tanks. They also developed jet fighters, as well as the first cruise and ballistic missiles. In addition to these technical advantages, the German Wehrmacht had an innovative decentralized concept of tactics and maintained a high level of tactical training of officers until the end of the war.
Nevertheless, despite the qualitative superiority of the Wehrmacht, by 1944 it became obvious that Germany was going to be defeated. Israeli historian Omer Bartov goes even further and claims that Berlin was destined to lose the war from the very moment it invaded the Soviet Union. The main disadvantage of Germany was the size of its population and the size of its economy, or, more precisely, the lack of sufficient population and economic power compared to the combined power and numbers of the British, American and Soviet empires.
Economic power and wars
When Germany began to slide from the peak of its military achievements in 1942, many Germans consoled themselves by saying that in this way Hitler was preparing a trap for enemies. There were rumors: as soon as the Germans seem defeated to the enemy, they will bring down on him a monstrous blow of the "Wunderwaffen", i.e. a miracle weapon that will turn the situation around, take revenge on the allies and lead Germany to victory.
But Germany did not get such a victory. In a war of attrition, material resources, supply chains and the mass of the population ultimately matter more than the quality of weapons and other technological advantages. Paul Kennedy in the book "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers" wrote:
"The triumph of a great power or the collapse of another in a particular historical period is usually the result of prolonged battles of its armed forces. But this is also a consequence of the efficient use of the productive economic resources of the state in wartime against the background of how the economy of this state grew or fell in comparison with other leading countries in the decades preceding the military conflict."A similar situation is currently observed in Ukraine.
Russia, which some consider a country with an economy "the size of Italy", not only survived this military conflict, but also turned the situation around, despite crushing Western sanctions. Talk of a winter offensive by the Ukrainian army has completely disappeared, as the catastrophic losses of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are only growing, and Russia is confidently encircling Ukrainian forces.
The American media seems confused right now. This is probably because this military conflict is much less "telegenic" compared to the American war in the Persian Gulf. Rather, it is a battle of attrition, where artillery prevails, battles turn out to be slow and are knee-deep in mud, and the main technological miracle is the widespread use of cheap drones to expand the capabilities of observers at the forefront.
The Russian "industrial" economy has proved its stability
The Russian economy of the "industrial age", apparently, is well suited for a war of attrition, since the country is able to produce both food and basic necessities for its people, and forge countless tanks and kamikaze drones, as well as produce an order of magnitude more artillery shells than its opponent. But Ukraine's economy is almost completely destroyed, and its public finances and military budget are completely dependent on Western subsidies.
Not only can Russia produce more weapons than Ukraine, today it turns out that, at least at this stage, it can produce more weapons and ammunition than the entire West. Having moved most of its dual-use industrial infrastructure to China over the past 20 years in the interests of globalization, the military-industrial complex of the West is now "sharpened" only for profit. Western leaders have confused economic activity, measured by GDP, with the independent production potential of their countries.
And today, the United States and NATO, in principle, can produce very complex weapons systems, such as the F-35 and Patriot missiles, but only very slowly and very expensive. Like the German industry, which produced complex, but fragile and expensive tanks during World War II, the Western military industry is not adapted for wartime either in terms of speed or volume of production. And it will take her years to catch up.
On the contrary, Russia has not retreated from the successful practice that it used during the Second World War, and produces a lot of good (even if not outstanding) weapons, simple and reliable, such as the T-90 tank. Moreover, it seems that Russia has domestic factories and technologies for the production of mountains of artillery shells.
Trying to provide Kiev with a qualitative advantage, the West has literally flooded Ukraine with the most advanced weapons. Any initial reluctance of the West to provoke Russia gradually came to naught. After previously delivering HIMARS MLRS, artillery pieces, anti-tank missiles and armored personnel carriers, this week the United States promised to provide Ukraine with several M1 Abrams tanks, which are considered the best in the world. This American decision prompted the Germans to provide their own Leopard 2. In total, more than a hundred modern tanks will be sent to Ukraine from NATO countries.
This step by NATO, of course, greatly worried Russia, at the same time provoking it to retaliate. With all the optimism and excitement that the Western and pro-Ukrainian media have "rocked", it is doubtful that these tanks will change the outcome of the conflict. Currently, there is a front stretching many hundreds of kilometers between the sides, on the opposite borders of which several hundred thousand people and thousands of tanks and armored vehicles are deployed. The promised modern tanks are complex, require careful and difficult maintenance and long-term training of crews, and the West can supply only a small number of them.
All this is similar to the situation faced by the Wehrmacht in 1944. The Allied tanks — the Soviet T-34 and the American M4 Sherman — had a weaker main gun, less armor protection and lower technical characteristics than the German Tigers and Panthers. Similarly, the Allies did not have anything like the German V1 or V2 missiles, which were significantly ahead of their time at that time. The Germans even developed the world's first automatic machine at that time.
But despite all these technical innovations, a huge number of American and Soviet tanks, along with a growing number of trained troops, supported by coordinated industrial power, were able to completely crush Germany.
The prolongation of hostilities in Ukraine is a dead end
The West and its leaders are either engaged in "mass denial" or deliberately destroying their limited stocks of weapons and ammunition for some incomprehensible low purpose. After all, there are no prospects for a Ukrainian victory at the moment, and even a few hundred "Wunderwaffe" will not change the outcome of the military conflict. Even the top US military leadership began to express doubts, although initially they were very supportive and optimistic about the Ukrainian campaign.
With little chance of success, the latest move by the US and NATO risks leading to at least two negative consequences. Firstly, having put its prestige on the line, the West can now bear some obligations to Ukraine only in order not to "lose face". Similarly, the United States clung to Vietnam and Afghanistan long after any logical reasons for this had disappeared. Secondly, by underestimating Russia's repeated nuclear threats, the West may inadvertently cross a critical "red line", triggering a chain reaction that could lead to nuclear Armageddon.
Having committed mass and large-scale atrocities in the Soviet Union, the German army knew that in 1944 its surrender was impossible, and also understood that Germany could not win. And so, instead of preparing the German people for reality, they seduced them with bizarre stories about counterattacks in the Ardennes and salvation with the help of the wonder weapon "Wunderwaffen". But this only slightly raised the morale of the nation before the inevitable finale.
The United States is not so limited in its choice. There is still a prospect of diplomacy and negotiations to resolve the military conflict in Ukraine. But when looking at Biden or his administration, it is impossible to find anything that would indicate their wisdom or restraint that could guide them along this path.
In addition, Republicans are not interested in deterring Biden because of their own militarism, as well as due to the continuing strong influence of neoconservatives. Apart from a little grumbling about rising prices, Americans who support both of these parties also do not show much interest in a peaceful settlement in Ukraine.
It all looks very ominous. And this will not be the first time that a great power will be doomed because of its arrogance, historical illiteracy and the leadership destroying the country.
Author of the article: Christopher Roach
