Tatarigami_UA kirjoittanut näin:
LÄHDE
In yesterday's speech, President Zelensky stated that he has ordered a reshuffle in the command structure of the Armed Forces. However, until General Syrski, widely disrespected within the army, is replaced, substantial improvements are unlikely.
General Syrski's leadership is bankrupt, his presence or orders coming from his name are demoralizing, and he undermines trust in the command in general. His relentless pursuit of tactical gains constantly depletes our valuable human resources, resulting in tactical advances such as capturing tree lines or small villages, with no operational goals in mind. This approach creates a never-ending cycle of fruitless assaults that drain personnel. His failure to withdraw troops from Bakhmut in a timely manner earlier this year, coupled with his obsession to retake it, by utilizing Wagner Group's tactics, further depletes our resources and has more far-reaching consequences than people might realize.
-
Suyi kirjoitti näin:
LÄHDE
I don't know why people are getting mad on Syrsky. This the high time when the war of attrition needs a tough-minded, determined, sometimes even stubborn commander, who may be hated by frontline combatants, yet can lead the war effort to victory.
Also, political consideration must be put in front of military ones, especially for the Ukranians which is largely fighting on civil morale and extensive foreign assistance.
Some decisions may be easier/beneficial to be make from military aspect, but what will they impact on the view from the Ukrainian society and the West? Can ZSU stay in fight without the support from them?
-
John Ridge kirjoitti näin:
LÄHDE
Ukraine has numerous professional, competent, and experienced general officers such as Mykhailo Zabrodskyi and Maksym Myrhorodskyy.
That their talents are not effectively utilized is a grave error.
Myrhorodskyy is the CDR of the DShV, the Air Assault Forces. He was principally responsible for the planning and execution of the Kharkiv offensive. Zabrodskyi is a (previously) retired DShV general that led a major successful offensive deep into Russian lines in 2014/15
-
Oliver Carroll kirjoitti näin:
LÄHDE
Oleksandr Syrsky new c-i-c. A “hyperactive pedant”, with a mastery of detail, he is well respected by Ukrainian general class. But some western military analysts have their doubts. As do many of those who have been under his strict command.
An often heard complaint is that Syrsky resembles Russian generals in an important regard: he makes people too scared to tell the truth to him. But there are those in ukr army who hold radically different views and see him as the most experienced general Ukraine has.
-
Oliver Alexander kirjoitti näin:
LÄHDE
I literally cannot think of a worse replacement than Oleksandr Syrskyi.
This is absolutely disastrous and will have very real consequences for the future of the war effort.
Not to mention the catastrophic effect it will have on the morale of troops on the frontline.
Never in history has a person failed upwards as disastrously as Oleksandr Syrskyi.
Promoting a person colloquially known amongst your army as “the butcher” when your are attempting to mobilize half a million additional troops isn’t the greatest idea.
-
Astraia Intel kirjoitti näin: On a positive note, Syrsky is an armor officer and a much more offense-oriented planner compared to Zaluzhny. We could see some daring moves.
LÄHDE
Johon tuli tällainen kommentti: Syrsky was responsible for the catastrophic Battle of Debaltseve. Defense of Kyiv and Kharkiv offensive was not his work. Holding Bakhmut forever was his idea. He is a soviet style, meat assault, hold whatever it takes commander. Many UA soldiers hate him. He is just good at PR.
Johon Astraia Intel vastasi näin: No. Syrsky was responsible for the defense of Kyiv at the onset of the invasion. Later he was appointed to lead the Ukrainian effort in Kharkiv, where he commanded the Kharkiv counteroffensive. There is no question about it, he is a very competent general.
Johon kommentin esittänyt vastasi näin: I have read various articles that stated that the kharkiv offensive was the result of local ukrainian commanders exploiting russian weakness and that syrsky just took the credit later.
Johon Astraia Intel vastasi näin: That is inaccurate. Syrsky is the primary architect of the Kharkiv counteroffensive. This was not a random infantry push for local commanders to have performed, it was a concentrated armored thrust. It was intended.
Johon Def Mon kommentoi näin: He wasn't. He was the one who the politicians decided to make the hero. Because he has always been their lapdog. They wanted to replace Zal back then already.
LÄHDE