se ve que ahora tuiter te deja escribir novelas o algo así en un tuit
What strategic value offers Bakhmut in itself? The answer is simple. None. This fact was even stated by Prigozhin, Strelkov and others. It is a military travesty, aiming only for political games of the involved Russian warlords.
The Ukrainian strategy on the other side has been coherent and quite clear. First, to deny Russians entry to Sloviansk and Kramatorsk, secondly, bind Russian forces and prepare for their counteroffensive and, third, in the process decimating their ranks, which - when reflecting 100,000 Russian casualties - they have achieved with flying colors. The only threat was a potential encirclement of Bakhmut with the subsequent destruction of the Ukrainian armies in it, but that was averted and Russians were forced to run against the heaviest fortification, a stupidity in itself and exactly how Ukrainian strategist can ask for.
Russians were so obsessed with Bakhmut that they were depleting lines and more importantly ammunition in Kreminna, Svatove, Avdiivka and Vuhledar. Literally every single one of those named areas ended in total disasters. Especially, Vuhledar can be called an epic fail.
The terms "pyrrhic victory, second Stalingrad etc." have been used more than once. Maybe we will even add "Bakhmut victory" to the books. It certainly deserves a place in military idiocy.
