Stalin has chosen to send the Red Army to liberate Nazi camps to give the illusion that the Nazis are losing, but Hitler could fire back with a "nuh-uh" yet!
There is Defence in depth, which means giving up territory for strategic gains and to keep your units intact. It also enables you to create situation that are favorable for you to attack and stretches enemy supply lines.
In terms of the Southern attack into the direction of Crimea defense in depth can't be used too well as the supply line is either north of the sea and thus on land, which is good, or over the bridge and all the way over Crimea which is bad.
So the extreme points are holding completely (which means focusing your troops on that area, which means that other areas are more easy to be contested), or withdrawing after tactical fights to lure the enemy into your formerly held territory. A mixture will happen. When Ukraine is able to push further into the territory a natural response would be to try to create pincer movements with reinforcements to make the forward troops encircled and force withdrawal.
Since all this happens in areas of mine fields (at the front) and artillery barrages both sides are currently focusing plenty forces which is dependent on supply chains. This doesn't mean it is a trench or positional warfare, but only has some elements of it within that area.
the Russians just stood there, the ukrainians went past them, but the frontline is where Russians are. What a savvy move that makes no fucking sense.
The Russians have utilized a rare unheard of tactic called "winning battles"......it has baffled western experts who have relied on the timeless strategy of "vibes in depth"
What were Ukraines objectives if not to dislodge the Russians...? No wonder the west can't win shit anymore, they're only just discovering the tactical gambit of "simply don't lose"
How's it feel to know that you're defending some sort of illusion you tankies? We're winning because they keep saying we are
to create the illusion that Ukraine hadn't achieved anything the Russians stopped the Ukrainians from achieving anything.
it's part of this persistent russian propaganda campaign called reality
The only way I can read it in a generous light is they are claiming Russia is over focusing on the front line to ensure no "victories" can be claimed.
That might hint that should a front line position be lost the fallback lines are not well defended? The other implication is that lots of "damage" is being done with no land gains? But I am just guessing what they mean and if it's the second point, yuck.
