>>5266
If we look a this process in relation to the Ukraine war, it seems like no one learned anything there, aside from the application of drones. The real process was just to wear down non-functional ideas. Whoever does that first gains the true image of the situation. The Russian combat squad organization which had been used in some smaller wars during the past 30 or so years, didn't work at all because the supply units were easily taken out which made the entire squad collapse. The open radio communications were laughed at, as well as the method of working where generals are close to the front line, which got some of them killed. But then we can look at what the NATO side did, and their mistakes were very costly. It's been very silent about those modern tanks after they were deployed. In the beginning it was said by the Ukrainians that Russia doesn't do maneuvers, they just do frontal assaults. But over time, both side seem to be doing this now, because any complex tactical method of working is worn down and doesn't make any difference in the grander scale. The main battlefields of the conflict are around cities with no strategic importance from a strict military perspective. But once public opinion is taken into the equation, being able to say "we won here" matters more, because it allows for further funding of your army. In the end, the ability to fuel your machine seems like the deciding factor, everything else is just blind learning which will happen anyway. Trying to impose specific methods may only impair this natural process.