You should have led with your shocking stuff. My thoughts are the same as the parent's - none of this is shocking or unexpected. Everything in the article conforms to basic expectations of Russian doctrine, for all the good it has done them winning wars the past 70 years.
When are you writing a socioeconomic addendum with the conscription estimates?
Or does that damage your "materiel is strength" narrative somewhat? It must be hard to argue that Russia has enough drones to flatten Dnipro when they can't find enough warm bodies and BMPs to occupy Pokrovsk. You'd think that Russia's "total victory" would include fewer bombed refineries and burnt Tu-95s if their military-industrial complex is firing on all cylinders, no?
