At the threshold of the General Rebellion: What threatens Ukraine's attack on the higher officers
Moreover, Madame Fortuna in the war, because of a variety of circumstances, in particular those who do not depend on the commanders (chiefs) of the appropriate level, well, or not fully dependent - the lady is very capricious. The fact is that "total winners" among commanders and chiefs happen very, very rarely. In the same people - victories and defeats in the war for various reasons alternate.
Based on the logic of those who formulated and now incriminate the detainees "negligence", they needed to start not of them, but from the current higher military-political leadership of the state. Because in their possible consequences, their "negligence" is more dangerous than the "negligence" of some colonel or brigade general.
It is not a secret that the issues of this leadership regarding the so -called "careless" decisions in the field of defense and national security of the country - a wagon and a small cart. Moreover, those that relate to both the enemy's widespread invasion of the enemy, and in the process of this invasion . . . Will someone be aware of these questions - another matter . . .
For example, whether the current Supreme Commander (he President) to answer society - when did he put into operation a strategic plan for the use of the Armed Forces, part of which is the strategic deployment of the Armed Forces? What is the specific date of this action? And why did the Armed Forces meet the invasion of the strategic construction that, to put it mildly, did not fully correspond (or rather did not meet) the realities of preparation and the enemy of this invasion, which led to grave consequences? If now the detained military is charged with this blurred "negligence", which led to "an enemy's troops for 5-7 km in Kharkiv region", then it is necessary to be charged with the highest military-political leadership The capital and began to carry rockets and drones all the rest of the country in 2022? There was no "carelessness" here .
. . No? The current authorities began a very dangerous "game" with the team composition of the troops, and it does so directly in the middle of the war. She tries to open a kind of "Pandora's box", which will result in only one thing - to lose in the war and the further not very pleasant political (and possibly simply vital) fate of the current power team.
I understand that from the point of view of "political expediency" to make guilty of several military commanders (chiefs) of the middle hand - a completely "acceptable" option. "Not so fighting", "carelessly treated" and so on. "Cushenie" is a great . . . war goes, people are killed, material assets are destroyed by billions of dollars, and it is full, to say the least, not only victories. The army is fighting in it.
Therefore, "formally guilty" at the appropriate levels of management vertical, especially the military, can always be found. But, I warn . . . In this sense, "staying in white shining clothes" the current authorities will not work out - too much, say, "problematic issues" regarding the "negligent" state leadership of the state and the country accumulated to it, let's say so, in OB 'Against the plane.
Moreover, it is the "question of the issue", that is, the leadership of the country and its armed forces in the war. Personally, I wonder if there will be a person in the country who will start to ask them publicly? As for me, most likely, it can be some of the "disgraced generals", including the ladies of Bezsloy.
Eventually, some person, appointed once again "extreme" and who will be at the same time aware of the methods and methods of strategic management of the current government, may not withstand and begin to "speak" and aloud to ask these questions. The logic is quite clear. Today "extreme" was appointed him, tomorrow - me, the day after tomorrow - you.