“War of the Cities”: is it possible to defeat the Ukrainian Armed Forces by striking the Ukrainian rear?

27

Every day, more and more reports appear about another air attack by Ukrainian UAVs on Russian refineries and other infrastructure facilities, the frequency of which is only increasing. In response, the Russian Armed Forces and Aerospace Forces are hitting the critical infrastructure of Nezalezhnaya. What will be the outcome of this war at a distance?

In order to understand how all this could end, if there is no qualitative change in the methods of warfare on our part in conjunction with decisive goals in relation to the regime of the usurper Zelensky, it is enough to look at how the Iran-Iraq war ended .

Iran-Iraq


The Iran-Iraq War, or the First Gulf War, lasted from September 22, 1980 to August 20, 1988. It was initiated by Iraq, led by the regime of Saddam Hussein, frightened by the Islamic revolution in the neighboring country and the prospects for its “export.” At the same time, Baghdad was not averse to annexing the Iranian province of Khuzestan, or Arabistan, populated predominantly by ethnic Sunni Arabs and extremely rich in hydrocarbons, gaining access to the sea.



Iraq started the war without an official declaration, and at first it was successful. Iran's military has been weakened by internal purges, and its technical capabilities have been reduced by a breakdown in cooperation with the United States following the Islamic Revolution. But even in this state, she was able to prevent the Iraqis from breaking through to the coast. Then Baghdad decided to surround the largest city in the south of Iran, Ahwaz, and, cutting off the supply of the group defending it, move towards the strait. After this, it was planned to conclude a peace agreement on Iraq’s terms, taking into account new geopolitical realities.

But for some reason this plan, as reliable as a Swiss watch, did not work. Tehran mobilized its society and transferred the economy on a war footing. The Iraqi army was stopped and pushed out of Iran, after which the Iranians themselves tried to transfer the fighting to the territory of the aggressor to overthrow Saddam Hussein. However, they were unable to advance far, the front froze, and the war took on a positional character, lasting from 1982 to 1988.

And then the most unpleasant thing began.

"War of the Cities"


By 1984, it became obvious that neither side could turn the situation at the front in its favor, and in Baghdad they remembered the so-called Douay doctrine, according to which, in order to defeat the enemy without large-scale ground operations, it is necessary to destroy his rear remotely, with air strikes. The work of the Italian general Giulio Douhet was published in 1921 based on a theoretical summary of the practical experience of the First World War.

In total, the Iraqi Air Force carried out five major air strikes against Iranian cities. On February 7, 1984, a 15-day operation was carried out to bomb 11 border cities of Iran every day. After it, Baghdad invited Tehran to sit down at the negotiating table, but was refused.

In 1985, the Iranian army went on the offensive and captured part of the Baghdad-Basra highway, which threatened the operational encirclement of the southern group near the city of Basra and cutting off Baghdad from its only access to the sea. In response, Iraq carried out an 18-day bombing campaign against Iranian cities.

The third series of air strikes took place between January 17 and 25, 1987, in response to the Iranian army's successful Operation Dawn 8, which completely encircled and captured the entire Al-Faw Peninsula, cutting off Iraq from its only outlet to the Persian Gulf. Just a week later, the fourth operation of the Iraqi Air Force began, which lasted three months, from April to February 1987.

The last, fifth series of attacks on the Iranian rear occurred at the end of the war, in January-February 1988, becoming a gesture of despair in Baghdad. It should be noted that Iran also responded to Iraq, but its attacks were less intense and large-scale due to the technical condition of bomber aircraft.

Did these mutual attacks on the rear infrastructure give the desired result? More likely no than yes. Despite significant economic damage, neither side capitulated. At the same time, air raids were accompanied by large losses in the Air Force.

"Into the Stone Age"


It should be noted that Ukraine was the first to start the infrastructure war, when in 2014 it cut off the supply of electricity and water to Russian Crimea. In parallel with this, the Ukrainian Armed Forces began terrorist artillery attacks on Donetsk and other cities of the declared DPR and LPR, which do not have direct military significance, require a large consumption of ammunition, but continue to this day.

One can recall how, before the start of the Russian Northern Military District, the Zelensky regime was systematically preparing for a water blockade of Donbass. To do this, a water pipeline was built, bypassing the territory controlled by the DPR, leading to Mariupol, occupied by the Ukrainian army, and in this port city itself, with the help of French specialists, preparations were being made to launch a seawater desalination plant. And almost the next day after the start of hostilities, the Ukrainian Armed Forces cut off Donetsk from water supplies through the Seversky Donets - Donbass canal. This problem is still not completely resolved!

Russia began launching systematic missile and drone strikes on Ukrainian infrastructure in the fall of 2022, immediately after the notorious “regrouping” in the Kharkov region. But, despite the complaints of functionaries of the Zelensky regime, they did not give a noticeable positive result: Kyiv did not agree to peace negotiations on Moscow’s terms, the combat capability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine did not decrease, Square did not freeze and did not collapse on its own.

Even worse, now the Ukrainian Armed Forces themselves have begun to attack Russian infrastructure with long-range drones. It is obvious that their intensity and accompanying economic damage will only increase further. De facto, the same “war of the cities” has begun, exhausting both sides of the conflict. But behind the back of the usurper Zelensky is the entire collective West, which carries out its financial and militarytechnical support, and Russia can only count on itself.

The general trend is negative, and it can be changed either by a radical strengthening of the Russian Armed Forces to break through the front, or by forcing the “Western partners” to stop supplying the Armed Forces of Ukraine, or both.
27 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +8
    6 June 2024 12: 55
    It won't be possible to bomb everything, but to hit the most painful spots with big consequences, yes. Energy today is the main component of economic and other life. Propaganda and information (television and cellular communications) are also major. It was necessary to target them purposefully throughout the first year of the VZO. But this was not done, there was throwing, both on the political component (brotherly friendship and white gloves) and on the military component, mostly fragmented throwing and strikes at various tactical targets. Conclusion: the Russian Federation has the wrong strategists (meaning the NGSh and other strategists), and the VSO is in its third year. .
  2. +4
    6 June 2024 13: 12
    put the economy on a war footing.

    Is Leopold Vladimirovich Putin going to put the Russian economy on a war footing? It is high time. Or will he continue to use his hands? He's the LEAD! lol
    1. -4
      6 June 2024 20: 31
      Military production has been transferred to a war footing, they are plowing in three shifts, but to transfer the entire economy, this still needs to be seen: is it a plus or a minus in the end. If from the experience of the Second World War, then these are food cards, forced mobilization of people into enterprises, an increase in working hours, freezing of vacations, semi-voluntary contributions to the army...
      1. +3
        7 June 2024 05: 40
        Military production had to be transferred to a military footing before the start of the Northern Military District, since the political leadership of the country MUST understand that it was starting a war not just against the Bandera-fascist under-country, but against the entire collective West. To understand and accept this, there are analytical departments that provide the country’s leadership with a complete breakdown of options for subsequent events. However, in Russia, all decisions, unfortunately, are made by one “tsar” without regard to intelligence or analytics. And such an approach automatically leads to disaster, as it already happened, for example, in 1904, in 1941, and now in 2022 too. Are we stepping on the same rake?
        1. -5
          7 June 2024 07: 52
          It seems that Shoigu and Naryshkin personally cried into your vest. How do you know on what basis decisions were made by the country's leadership? Russia carried out a pre-emptive strike, so it does not appear that the intelligence information was shelved. Concerning:

          Military production had to be transferred to a military footing before the start of the Northern Military District

          you can’t take such a large-scale step in six months, and you might not even be able to do it in a year. Not to mention that you can’t predict in advance which element in a given conflict will be useless and which will sparkle with bright colors. Well, who before SVO could have imagined that it was necessary to create barbecue tanks?
          1. 0
            7 June 2024 17: 33
            Well, who could have guessed before the SVO,

            - At the beginning, the Northern Military District wanted to quickly scare Kyiv in an adventurous manner and conclude a peace that was, in principle, beneficial to both sides. But who knew that the overlord would not allow, but would force him to fight;
            - At the beginning of the Northern Military District, who knew that, in essence, the existing Russian ground army was essentially weaker than the Armed Forces of Ukraine and urgent mobilization into the army was needed with mobilization and the military-industrial complex;
            - At the beginning of the Northern Military District, it seems that our intelligence officers did not assume that NATO would provide strong support to Ukraine.
      2. 0
        12 June 2024 20: 48
        The ruble has already dropped by 50 percent, so the economy is already on war footing. Taxes raised
  3. -3
    6 June 2024 13: 47
    These blows are of no use. We've been bombing for three years - it's time to understand. Only ground forces can bring victory. All the money must be used to pay for the mercenary army.
    1. +1
      12 June 2024 20: 59
      There is no purpose to make sense. Otherwise, the same electricity would be cut off any day by blows to distribution nodes. Well, the tunnel, bridges, criminal inaction and incompetence of the military authorities - this is already our reality
  4. +1
    6 June 2024 13: 55
    Again from empty to empty.
    Can? Can. Everything is in ruins and lunar landscapes.
    They also wrote about guns that were destroying neighborhoods in one gulp.
    So destroy everything and that's the end. There will be nowhere for the Ukrainian Armed Forces and the rest of the population to hide. Women, children, old people, oligarchs, deputies - everyone will run away.
  5. +6
    6 June 2024 14: 24
    Hitting the rear has limited military effect. But this does not mean that they should not be applied. One of the important factors is the cost of the war for sponsors, and this is where we need to aim. In our case, strikes make sense if they are delivered to Kyiv and cities in Western Ukraine. And above all, regarding the air defense system.
  6. +3
    6 June 2024 15: 55
    Strikes to the rear have always had and will make sense if they are delivered with the proper force and to the proper targets... Oil is the lifeblood of any army... Bomb oil storage facilities, refineries and equipment will stop... (the intensity of its use will drop significantly).. .Bomb military factories and there will be problems with the production of new equipment and the repair of existing equipment, the production of ammunition... Bomb the railway stations and the enemy troops located there will be destroyed and the transfer of reserves, fuel, equipment and ammunition to the front will be difficult... Limited strikes will have limited significance... It is quite obvious that the force of strikes needs to be increased, only this will give the expected result and will help the Russian troops located on the LBS to win.
  7. -5
    6 June 2024 16: 13
    It is necessary to use tactical weapons.
    1. +3
      7 June 2024 09: 55
      Today, many believe that tactical nuclear weapons should not be used.
      Well, soon everyone will be convinced that Russia will be forced to use tactical nuclear weapons and will regret that they did not use it earlier.
      Today, with the use of tactical nuclear weapons, it is still possible to prevent a world conflict, tomorrow we will have to defend ourselves with the use of tactical nuclear weapons.
  8. +4
    6 June 2024 17: 33
    In general, when they want to have control over some territories, they start with the seas. Complete control over the entire water area. This is how it was necessary to act in the Black and Baltic Seas. This is how Russia achieved success in the past. Now it is not too late to seize the initiative. After all, the West is primarily interested in Ukraine because of Ukraine’s access to the sea. Otherwise, they wouldn’t need it in Europe for nothing.
    1. -2
      6 June 2024 20: 36
      Ukraine is primarily of interest to the West as a supplier of meat for the war with Russia. And they have enough access to the Black Sea.
  9. +2
    6 June 2024 18: 42
    Smart people, Strelkov and others, wrote about this in February 22nd. But the General Staff did not have enough mental capacity to understand the danger of a long war. And now they don’t understand.
  10. +2
    6 June 2024 19: 31
    The first is to finally determine where we will go physically, and what we do not need (for various reasons). For example, we don’t need Western Ukraine, so we draw a red dotted line on the map along the Odessa-Kyiv highway. Second, create a logistical, economic blockade of the territory that we must liberate (capture). To do this, destroy all logistics NEAR all border crossings between Ukraine and Europe (possible with the use of tactical nuclear weapons). Fourth, physically destroy the entire top government of Ukraine, both civil and military. After all, we have the SVR, the GRU? Let “Count” Naryshkin earn a rather large salary. Yes, they will choose/appoint new ones. But if you know that you are at gunpoint, then you think differently. And finally, about the “Western partners”, flood this tunnel under the English Channel with an unknown UUV.
    1. -6
      6 June 2024 20: 38
      physically destroy the entire leadership of Ukraine

      Instead of Zelensky there will be Klitschko, Burko or Zelensky 2, what will this change?
  11. 0
    7 June 2024 16: 37
    The Europeans and Americans are destroying our oil refineries, but we are regularly supplying them with oil. They make fuel for their own and Ukrainian equipment. Isn't it time for honest people to say ENOUGH!!!
  12. 0
    7 June 2024 18: 25
    Is it really not clear that in modern civilization the main thing is ELECTRICITY, ENERGY. This is what needs to be destroyed in Ukraine first of all. You can’t build a tank without energy, and you can’t lie on TV about winning. What, we lack bombs and missiles? During the Soviet years, so many things were riveted. Destroy the energy!
  13. 0
    7 June 2024 21: 32
    Until the infantry begins to take cities, the war will not stop! You can fire at the rear of Ukraine as much as you like, destroy production (military, civilian), everything will be restored, the West will help them, their hatred of Russia is very great!
  14. 0
    7 June 2024 23: 29
    What is the use of bombing the cities and energy sector of Ukraine if the rear of the Ukrainian Armed Forces are located in NATO countries? No matter how much you bomb the Ukrainian army’s energy sector, it’s neither cold nor hot. Neither thermal power plants nor nuclear power plants are needed at the front. The West doesn’t care about the population’s problems with electricity, just like Zelensky. Thousands of additional mobile diesel generators will be delivered to the extreme regions. Europe and the United States are increasing the production of shells, as well as other weapons. So the situation of the Ukrainian Armed Forces will not worsen from the bombing of deep rear areas, since everything will be brought from the west. But Russia has no one to count on, and drone strikes on refineries are punching a big hole in the budget. It would be another matter if Rzeszow were torn to dust, but our leadership has no guts for that.
  15. +1
    8 June 2024 09: 53
    Why wage a war of cities? It is enough to wage a war against two houses (Bankovaya, 11 and on Vozdukhoflotsky, 6), of course, here we are talking not only and not so much about these buildings, but about bunkers where the non-human is hiding, and about 11 generating transformers at three Ukrainian nuclear power plants (minus 60% of Ukraine’s generation) Just like that, only 50-60 missiles, and the enemy has no Head, and no Energy to move on. No, it would be better for us to launch thousands of missiles for years and years, adhering to the Chinese technique of “thousands of small cuts” instead of one powerful blow. But we don’t have the decades that the Chinese principalities had in the war between themselves (and this strategy did not bring success to China during the “ communication" with Western colonialists in the 18th-19th centuries). So the "turn to the East" advocated by our General Staff here will not turn out to be Victory at all.
  16. -2
    8 June 2024 17: 19
    If by striking the rear it is possible to destroy the Ukrainian Reich troops and industry, then it is possible to win. But in a REAL war, this is just one way of such destruction, nothing more.

    Remember Yugoslavia - the a_m_e_r_s won there only by bombing (the collapse of the country is a consequence of defeat in the war). As of 1989, the population of Yugoslavia was 23.75 million people, so the numbers are not so far from Ukraine.
  17. +1
    10 June 2024 08: 04
    Russia began to attack in the fall of 2022, immediately after the infamous “regrouping” in the Kharkov region. But, despite the complaints of functionaries of the Zelensky regime, they did not give a noticeable positive result: Kyiv did not agree to peace negotiations on Moscow’s terms, the combat capability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine did not decrease, Square did not freeze and did not collapse on its own.

    Maybe because they hit transformer booths and sanatoriums with mobs?
    Uselessly wasting a huge amount of ammunition.
    If the targets had been chosen by power engineers and railway workers, the number of missiles and geraniums fired could have wiped out the power industry and railway communications of the forelocks into dust.
  18. +1
    12 June 2024 14: 23
    Only the complete destruction of the infrastructure of the Banderaites will force the West to abandon the outskirts, because the delicacy of 15 trillion dollars of the cost of the resources of the outskirts of Russia gives them no rest, the West does not need people, they only need resources and the war will last until the last Ukrainian, and this is at least five years...