Since the early months of the war my primary argument has been that Ukraine is trying to hide steep declines in manpower, and that this ruse would eventually be exposed. Bottom line? Wars are won by men, not by DARPA technology and suitcases of fiat cash.

A year ago mainstream analysts said Ukrainians troops (with NATO's help) would soon destroy the Russian military and party on the beaches of Crimea. Today, the establishment admits manpower shortages are a reality and they admit Russia is overrunning Ukraine's defensive positions all over the front. Soon, Russia will control the entirety of the Donbas region and beyond using attrition warfare.

The "experts" have no idea what they're talking about, or, they're lying to the public on purpose. Either way their opinions are not to be trusted.

As a student of history (and of military tactics) I can only relate to you what I see with an objective eye. I'm not in Ukraine and not on the front lines looking from both sides (and neither are the experts). I'm not privy to special intel and I don't have access to the war rooms in Kyiv or the Kremlin (and neither are the experts). My goal here is NOT to break down a play-by-play of the war, I only hope to point out the greater truths being uncovered as the situation unfolds.

The kind of war we are seeing in Ukraine has not been fought by a western military since Korea. When it comes to industrial scale attrition warfare there are NO REAL EXPERTS in the western world still working at the Department of Defense. They don't exist.

It is here that I want to begin because there are many patriots in the US preparing for what we believe will be widespread internal and external conflagration – Regional wars in multiple nations as well as rebellions here at home. What do the events in Ukraine teach us about the future of war? What classic assumptions have been debunked and what are the odds of success in the new strategic world? Let's get started…

Maneuver Warfare Is Dying

The core emphasis of maneuver warfare is the use of initiative and surprise; the fast coordination of units to envelop the enemy before he realizes what is happening. It relies on shock and awe to demoralize, the idea being that the enemy can be defeated by chasing him down and using superior technology to render his defensive positions useless (the doctrine of the Vietnam War). It's hard to say if these tactics ever really worked, but what we know now is that they will not work in future wars.

NATO doctrine in particular is proving to be quite useless. It relies too heavily on minimizing losses to highly trained officers. All maneuver warfare requires finely tuned tactics combined with technological know-how. Once experienced officers are shot down replacing them is difficult. Where Russia might be able to sustain hundreds-of-thousands of casualties, western armies are often broken by a fraction of those losses.