Russia and Ukraine

[Pat Mustard]

When you invade another country, with an overwhelming number of hardware, including T90s ´n stuff, then get pushed back, several times (Kiev, Izium), ending in a rout, then things are not looking good for you. Then things didnt go according to plan
Period

From what I remember, the number used initially was not that overwhelming. Many commented that an army would require a force 3 times greater than the defending forces, but the Russians brought only around 1 times, which they would know was insufficient.... unless there was some misdirection involved.

Ultimately, I see Russia winning, in which the West's efforts will have just been to prolong a senseless and unnecessary war.  It is most certainly not a hope, but, a prediction, in part, based upon their historical behavior and culture.

IF (big if) Russia does have the manpower to drag on the war, then they may hold on to some of the captured provinces if they are still in control of them when the Ukrainian army runs out of people or the West stops supplying weapons (whichever happens first).
If there is no manpower or no weapons, then they will have to keep on retreating. What this will mean for Russia in a geopolitical sense, I don't know.

Russia, if they knew what they were doing, probably had sufficient troops to win the war early (in a similar manner to the second Gulf War), given their superior manpower and, allegedly, weaponry. What analists were saying was that they would need in excess of 800,000 troops permanently garrisoned in Ukraine to win the occupation, at minimal resistance levels.

Now this was predicated on the Russian army being trained to NATO standards, independent flexible command structures, a proper air strategy and their on paper materiel strength being reflected in battle. None of these were true as it turned out.