Perhaps. But expanding ones borders through conquest also seems medieval, and guided missiles are poor tools for holding territory, so the classics still have a role to play.

And yet a glance at how the Russian army is equipped…

Pretty much is.

They’re just designed to slow down the movement of troops. They can be dealt with fairly easily, but you do have to move them out of the way before you can move vehicles across. This buys a little extra time.

All the fancy tech in the world doesn’t help you take and hold land. That takes plain old boots on the ground.

You’d be surprised how much of modern warfare is pretty medieval in a way.

When I was in the army, that sort of comment was pretty common in the earlier lecturers.

Basically boils down to limited resources. Not everyone in the military gets to have those toys, and armies still need to get their troops in if they want to invade, and building roads and bridges is pretty inefficient when there’s roads. And if those roads have spiky things which prevent tanks from moving, well, then… gonna have to deal with that.

Modern warfare seems to be very similar to world war two style warfare. Just with the things you listed added ontop. It’s not like they replaced the warfare.

For instance the war in ukraine includes Blitzkrieg combined arms type offensives, world war 1 type trench warfare, soviet type attrition warfare, and some of the most modern drone and missile warfare.

Ah, a fellow enjoyer of greek mythology!

Kaliningrad has a land border with Lithuania, but not with Russia

You do realise that Koenigsberg is, at least for now, part of Russia?

My dumbass thought that was an aerial photo

almost choked on my sandwich lmao