Azerbaijan Armenia Tensions

[Azeri441]

Azerbaijani army's performance during this war is quite mixed,but we can note an effective use of drones and special forces which made a difference on the ground.

Mixed?

Azerbaijan got to the center of Karabakh in a month and forced Armenian forces to withdraw from Karabakh, while capturing more equipment than it has lost against an enemy that had 30 years to fortify its positions against a potential attack. Azerbaijani special forces managed to capture Shusha, the most fortified city in Karabakh, in a matter of 3 to 4 days without any air support due to shitty weather. If you provide me any other conflict with such decisive victory in the 20th or 21st century then you are more than welcome to.
The only other conflict I can think of is between NATO and Iraq, and those 2 sides had 50 years of technological difference.

Outside of drones, Armenia and Azerbaijan are pretty evenly matched, both sides rely heavily on Soviet weapons, in fact Armenia has more advanced aircraft than Azerbaijan.

 

[Skyfall]

I really salute the brave soldiers of Azerbaijan who against odds and precedence, made this victory. And it is easy to say that the drones did all the work but when they had to break through front line defences and when they were advancing around Shusha with clouds above, they had only God above.

I wanted to acknowledge something about the Armenians who didn't fee their posts but I heard it once said that there is a fine line between bravery and stupidity. And if you are fighting for whatever cause and prepared to sacrifice your life, then make sure it is a just cause.

I have thought a lot about conflict recently and I asked myself, what would I do if I had to defend my home (wherever it maybe) from an enemy that has such superior firepower. (I think the drone videos really make you think about how the people targeted had no chance in most cases and no matter how brave an individual may have been, it didn't make the slight difference). And my conclusion is that I would probably pack up and get going someplace else unless I felt that I could make any difference in sacrificing my life.

But saying that I would also question the cause, defence of homeland, defence of religion. And looking at our Prophet's example, peace be upon him, He chose to leave his beloved Mecca and chose his life and the lives of his followers before a place, no matter how revered and sacred that place was. Perhaps because religion and beliefs will die with the people, but places will remain. So if you value your belief you should value your life foremost.

 

[Skyfall]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326805296497430528

 

[Skyfall]

Armenia to pay price if it violates Nagorno-Karabakh peace deal, FM Çavuşoğlu says

Armenia would have to suffer consequences if it does not abide by the terms of the cease-fire, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu said...

www.dailysabah.com

 

[Vergennes]

Mixed?

Azerbaijan got to the center of Karabakh in a month and forced Armenian forces to withdraw from Karabakh, while capturing more equipment than it has lost against an enemy that had 30 years to fortify its positions against a potential attack. Azerbaijani special forces managed to capture Shusha, the most fortified city in Karabakh, in a matter of 3 to 4 days without any air support due to shitty weather. If you provide me any other conflict with such decisive victory in the 20th or 21st century then you are more than welcome to.
The only other conflict I can think of is between NATO and Iraq, and those 2 sides had 50 years of technological difference.

Outside of drones, Armenia and Azerbaijan are pretty evenly matched, both sides rely heavily on Soviet weapons, in fact Armenia has more advanced aircraft than Azerbaijan.

Yes mixed.

Good performances of special forces and drone operators,but poor performances of other conventional forces. Frontal attacks in open fields,many convoys annihilated/ambushed due to lack of air support,reconnaissance,entire group of soldiers sent to their death without any kind of support,lack of effective and combined arms operations.... I could go on.

The main focus of operation was the south,a mostly flat terrain where the Armenians,harassed by drones could hardly hold their positions (They did quite well despite the odds) when reinforcements and supplies were systematically targeted by drones. Azeri forces were bogged down in the north and majority of their assaults thwarted,but the terrain isn't similar though.

Azerbaijan had superiority in every fields and what reduced Armenia's war potential is the drones due to a total control of the air and lack of effective (or used effectively) air defences.

The drones supplied by Israel and Turkey took a great part in your "decisive victory". Otherwise the course of the war could have been even worse for your country.

 

[Ryder]

Yes mixed.

Good performances of special forces and drone operators,but poor performances of other conventional forces. Frontal attacks in open fields,many convoys annihilated/ambushed due to lack of air support,reconnaissance,entire group of soldiers sent to their death without any kind of support,lack of effective and combined arms operations.... I could go on.

The main focus of operation was the south,a mostly flat terrain where the Armenians,harassed by drones could hardly hold their positions (They did quite well despite the odds) when reinforcements and supplies were systematically targeted by drones. Azeri forces were bogged down in the north and majority of their assaults thwarted,but the terrain isn't similar though.

Azerbaijan had superiority in every fields and what reduced Armenia's war potential is the drones due to a total control of the air and lack of effective (or used effectively) air defences.

The drones supplied by Israel and Turkey took a great part in your "decisive victory". Otherwise the course of the war could have been even worse for your country.

Armenia's performance was much worse LOL

They got stomped even without drones the Armenians would have still got stomped conventionally.

You are overplaying the armenians a lot.

 

[BordoEnes]

Yes mixed.

Good performances of special forces and drone operators,but poor performances of other conventional forces. Frontal attacks in open fields,many convoys annihilated/ambushed due to lack of air support,reconnaissance,entire group of soldiers sent to their death without any kind of support,lack of effective and combined arms operations.... I could go on.

The main focus of operation was the south,a mostly flat terrain where the Armenians,harassed by drones could hardly hold their positions (They did quite well despite the odds) when reinforcements and supplies were systematically targeted by drones. Azeri forces were bogged down in the north and majority of their assaults thwarted,but the terrain isn't similar though.

Azerbaijan had superiority in every fields and what reduced Armenia's war potential is the drones due to a total control of the air and lack of effective (or used effectively) air defences.

The drones supplied by Israel and Turkey took a great part in your "decisive victory". Otherwise the course of the war could have been even worse for your country.

You could divide the overal performance in two parts: Strategic and Tactical. In terms of strategy they were excellent. They manoeuvred with lightning speed and took much of the south in a short period, even with drones that is very good performance by the Azerbaijani Armed Forces regardless. Especially when you consider wars tend to last for years and are often bogged down in well fortified lines of contact and the fact Armenia had nearly 3 decades to make these fortified lines.

Tactically speaking, meaning on much smaller and isolated scenario's it could have been better yes. However even this is not as remotely as bad as it seems. The enemy had geography on their side, it was simply an area that was easy and prone for laying ambushes. The Azerbaijani's in return used the same tactics when they absolutely crushed the Armenians at Susa/Shusha.

Much of their northern march has been a complete succes aswell. It took them a month to take the south and only 2 weeks to infilitrate and seize the most heavely fortified position in the area. The Azeri SOF deserve big credit for this.

 

[Skyfall]

Armenia's performance was much worse LOL

They got stomped even without drones the Armenians would have still got stomped conventionally.

You are overplaying the armenians a lot.

He has been listening to the Armenian propaganda for so long that he is believing their old narrative. Problem is that they have just admitted to getting severely beaten. They also just admitted to not telling the truth about the war.

 

[Vergennes]

Armenia's performance was much worse LOL

They got stomped even without drones the Armenians would have still got stomped conventionally.

You are overplaying the armenians a lot.

I've never claimed the Armenians were a more effective force or super soldiers.

Major parts of their forces were composed of poorly trained and equipped conscripts. Their entire force failed to adapt to the new way of warfare,lighter with a greater use of new technologies (such as drones).

Instead they conceived war like in the good ol' soviet union,a heavy frontal confrontation.

 

[Ryder]

I've never claimed the Armenians were a more effective force or super soldiers.

Major parts of their forces were composed of poorly trained and equipped conscripts. Their entire force failed to adapt to the new way of warfare,lighter with a greater use of new technologies (such as drones).

Instead they conceived war like in the good ol' soviet union,a heavy frontal confrontation.

This war proven once again how Soviet style warfare is obsolete.

This explains the enormous modernisation that the Russian army is undergoing especially tactics and strategies.

Conscription is already obsolete you cant force a person to fight the way to go is professionalism.

Technology is what is pushing the professional revolution.

 

[Azeri441]

Yes mixed.

Good performances of special forces and drone operators,but poor performances of other conventional forces. Frontal attacks in open fields,many convoys annihilated/ambushed due to lack of air support,reconnaissance,entire group of soldiers sent to their death without any kind of support,lack of effective and combined arms operations.... I could go on.

The main focus of operation was the south,a mostly flat terrain where the Armenians,harassed by drones could hardly hold their positions (They did quite well despite the odds) when reinforcements and supplies were systematically targeted by drones. Azeri forces were bogged down in the north and majority of their assaults thwarted,but the terrain isn't similar though.

Azerbaijan had superiority in every fields and what reduced Armenia's war potential is the drones due to a total control of the air and lack of effective (or used effectively) air defences.

The drones supplied by Israel and Turkey took a great part in your "decisive victory". Otherwise the course of the war could have been even worse for your country.

Its pretty clear your judgement of Azerbaijani success is based on not understanding the Azerbaijani strategy,

Please provide these "many" ambushed convoys, I have seen about 4 to 5 ambushed convoys, thats not many ambushes in a conventional war for countries with 70,000 soldiers on one side and 100,000 on the other.

Frontal attacks in open fields? did you miss the part of 30 years of defensive buildup? Karabakh is small and was entirely covered by multi-level defensive lines, there is no other way but to conduct frontal assault, please do look at the map of Karabakh, and come up with a strategy that doesn't involve a frontal assault, you want Azerbaijani forces to go through Iran or Armenia?

Azerbaijani forces weren't bugged down in the North, Azerbaijani forces didn't push because they wanted to spread Armenian defenses as thinly as possible which allowed Azerbaijani forces in the south to capture the most important city in Karabakh in a month, and according to Armenian president himself, Armenian forces of 25,000 were surrounded after that capture, which lead to the signing of Armenian withdrawal.

As for your last part, did you miss me saying Azerbaijani SOFs captured Shusha, a natural fortress, within 3 to 4 days without support of drones due to bad weather?

Even Armenians don't understand how such progress occurred.

Here is a photo of Shusha and again, you seem to think Azerbaijani victory wasn't impressive, so please do provide a more impressive victory.

 

[Nilgiri]

I've never claimed the Armenians were a more effective force or super soldiers.

Major parts of their forces were composed of poorly trained and equipped conscripts. Their entire force failed to adapt to the new way of warfare,lighter with a greater use of new technologies (such as drones).

Instead they conceived war like in the good ol' soviet union,a heavy frontal confrontation.

They had not much option, their economy is structured suboptimally and limited from get go by 3 times smaller population compared to AZ.

Armenia did not have much adequate fiscal space that can sustainably acquire, absorb and integrate newer technology (after say paying the bills for regular stuff).

12 billion dollar GDP compared to near 50 billion GDP for Azerbaijan today. Azerbaijan also has better price level (improves PPP, this helps with its fiscal space as each dollar counts for more on the ground).

Also:

Military Expenditure in Armenia averaged 264.42 USD Million from 1992 until 2018...

Military Expenditure in Azerbaijan averaged 851.33 USD Million from 1992 until 2018

 

[Anmdt]

I've never claimed the Armenians were a more effective force or super soldiers.

Major parts of their forces were composed of poorly trained and equipped conscripts. Their entire force failed to adapt to the new way of warfare,lighter with a greater use of new technologies (such as drones).

Instead they conceived war like in the good ol' soviet union,a heavy frontal confrontation.

Armenia has/had to perform better, they had decades to prepare defenses, trenches and they were in defensive stand while Azerbaijan was the offensive side, it naturally makes sense without drones Azerbaijan wouldn't be able to pierce through and Azerbaijan without drones would have suffered more losses,but it ended vice-versa because Armenia hasn't accepted the truth in 40 days.

Moreover they have seen Azerbaijan acquiring suicide drones,and later tactical drones yet they weren't prepared for the danger. They stood still watching their long-range SAM being picked out, later the Medium range air-defenses were gone, they didn't instruct soldiers at front lines on how to counter drone strikes and how to walk around. Until the last days you could see these guys gathering around, crawling in trenches or running into shelters or towards shelter door while they had to scatter in open field, it was as if they didn't know how a drone works, or they didn't even know the drones were hitting them -which indicates a censorship in front lines-.
Except commanders and maybe SOF of Armenian/ Artsakh Army, the conscripts or infantry , even artillery and tank operators weren't aware of drone danger and weren't instructed on how to avoid with minimum damage, it shows a major deficiency when soldiers running towards trucks upon hearing sound of MAM-L and ending up at their remote shelters and destroyed with one strike altogether.

 

[CAN_TR]

Good for the Armenians that they surrendered otherwise those fools were on the brink of total encirclement and destruction.

Especially fooling the Armenians Air Defence Forces with remote controlled AN-2 and locating them was pretty smart. Thinning their lines and start a major push from the South also. I expected more resistance from nearly three decades of preparation.

 

[Test7]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326854699161673729

 

[Vergennes]

Its pretty clear your judgement of Azerbaijani success is based on not understanding the Azerbaijani strategy,

Please provide these "many" ambushed convoys, I have seen about 4 to 5 ambushed convoys, thats not many ambushes in a conventional war for countries with 70,000 soldiers on one side and 100,000 on the other.

Frontal attacks in open fields? did you miss the part of 30 years of defensive buildup? Karabakh is small and was entirely covered by multi-level defensive lines, there is no other way but to conduct frontal assault, please do look at the map of Karabakh, and come up with a strategy that doesn't involve a frontal assault, you want Azerbaijani forces to go through Iran or Armenia?

You don't attack frontally your enemy without "flattening" the terrain and their defences,unless you want to use your soldiers as cannon fodder.

I think you missed the videos from the start of the conflict where tanks and infantry were getting decimated on open fields by simply going in frontally against Armenian defences.

Azerbaijani forces weren't bugged down in the North, Azerbaijani forces didn't push because they wanted to spread Armenian defenses as thinly as possible which allowed Azerbaijani forces in the south to capture the most important city in Karabakh in a month, and according to Armenian president himself, Armenian forces of 25,000 were surrounded after that capture, which lead to the signing of Armenian withdrawal.

It isn't that they "didn't push",the attempts were simply thwarted by the Armenians. But I agree the terrain is much more difficult in the north than it is in the south.

As for your last part, did you miss me saying Azerbaijani SOFs captured Shusha, a natural fortress, within 3 to 4 days without support of drones due to bad weather?

Even Armenians don't understand how such progress occurred.

Here is a photo of Shusha and again, you seem to think Azerbaijani victory wasn't impressive, so please do provide a more impressive victory.

View attachment 6214

I did say special forces showed good performances as well as drone operators. (In case you don't read what I write)

You talk about the battle of Şuşa,I am talking about the whole performance of your armed forces during this one month and two weeks of conflict.

Armenia has/had to perform better, they had decades to prepare defenses, trenches and they were in defensive stand while Azerbaijan was the offensive side, it naturally makes sense without drones Azerbaijan wouldn't be able to pierce through and Azerbaijan without drones would have suffered more losses,but it ended vice-versa because Armenia hasn't accepted the truth in 40 days.

I agree. However you couldn't call the Armenian defenses very "sophisticated". Yet again we are talking about a very poor country (that today has a GDP inferior to that of Mauritius) compared to a rich country like Azerbaijan who benefits from what the Caspian sea farts.

 

[Anmdt]

You don't attack frontally your enemy without "flattening" the terrain and their defences,unless you want to use your soldiers as cannon fodder.

I think you missed the videos from the start of the conflict where tanks and infantry were getting decimated on open fields by simply going in frontally against Armenian defences.



It isn't that they "didn't push",the attempts were simply thwarted by the Armenians. But I agree the terrain is much more difficult in the north than it is in the south.



I did say special forces showed good performances as well as drone operators. (In case you don't read what I write)

You talk about the battle of Şuşa,I am talking about the whole performance of your armed forces during this one month and two weeks of conflict.



I agree. However you couldn't call the Armenian defenses very "sophisticated". Yet again we are talking about a very poor country (that today has a GDP inferior to that of Mauritius) compared to a rich country like Azerbaijan who benefits from what the Caspian sea farts.

I don't think decoys of vehicles -tanks- artillery and guerilla tactics with small groups would cost that much.

 

[guest_07]

Assalamu'alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh to Muslim
& Good day to the rest

ANALYSIS - Five key military takeaways from Azerbaijani-Armenian war​

Lesson 1:
Without adequate sensors, electronic warfare cover, and counter-drone weaponry,
traditional ground units are in Trouble

Lesson 2:
Integration of land-based fire-support and drones
looms large in modern warfare

Lesson 3:
Intra-war deterrence gain importance

Lesson 4: Drones make good SEAD assets
against low-to-mid-range air defenses

Lesson 5:
Despite the drone age,
military-geostrategic calculus still matters


https://www.aa.com.tr/en/analysis/a...keaways-from-azerbaijani-armenian-war/2024430

 

[Test7]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326875616369577987

 

[Bogeyman]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1326894512015355906