I don't think I'm wrong that this is essentially the first large-scale conflict between militaries equipped with truly modern weapons, and it feels rather Spanish Civil War-ish in the sense that modern militaries are getting a real-time lesson in what works and what doesn't in the modern arsenal.
As a former air defender (e.g., surface to air missile soldier), there is a lot about what is happening in Ukraine that is fascinating. While my knowledge is dated, at one time I knew quite a bit about how the air and ground wars interact.
I'm not surprised, but I'm disappointed in the lack of understanding by arm-chair generals about why a "no-fly zone" or sending Polish Mig 29s to Ukraine have serious limitations in their efficacy/usefulness. Imagine, politics seems to have more influence on some people than the specifics of how things actually work.
This has also, so far, been quite an education in the complexity and difficulty of military operations. The old saying is that amateurs talk tactics, professionals talk logistics, and we're seeing a good example of the logistical problems in warfare playing out in Ukraine. We're also seeing the impact of troop morale, training, and equipment. Combined arms operations (e.g., infantry, armor, artillery, air, all at the same time) are difficult, and require practice to do well. And the least effective equipment relied on by any single unit ends up being the equipment that dictates how that unit operates.
It both fascinates me, and at the same time horrifies me to take an analytical view of something that is nothing short of horrific in practice.
