Keeping mind that US aircraft were flying over Iraq for around 8 years and in Vietnam for well over 10 years and that a majority of the aircraft lost in Vietnam were helicopters providing close air support to ground troops, a tactic that the Russians are even afraid to try in Ukraine. In contrast the Russians lost 55 aircraft in less than seven months. FYI In total, the United States military lost in Vietnam almost 10,000 aircraft, helicopters and UAVs (3,744 planes,[3] 5,607 helicopters[2] and 578 UAVs[1] ).
I actually wasn't but considering that the bridge was used to transport military equipment from Russia to Crimea from which it was ultimately transported to Russian troops it was a legitimate military target. Not so with civilian residential neighborhoods. Blast on Crimean Bridge Deals Blow to Russian War Effort in Ukraine
But somehow you believe that Russia is using precision missiles to slaughter civilians. Presumably because Russians.
multiple sources from several different countries across various mediums lol. I’d say try harder but you already post too much.
The 143 was a very important number. 141 was what they got to condemn the initial invasion, so getting to that number was critical, to show the world wasn’t blinking. this was how much effort went into it. U.S., Europe whip U.N. votes for historic Russia rebuke
Aaaand then there’s the juicy idiotic irony of this little nugget. Russia protests over Japan's firing of HIMARS in exercise with U.S
Well, there’s only one of me vs. maniacal counter-offensives. “Putin is a genocidal maniac!” then ... “Ha-Ha! Russia’s moving at tectonic pace on the ground. Nearly eight months and they haven’t won yet.”
Good civilian deaths vs Bad civilian deaths depends on whether it’s the US or Russia doing the killing ... Good Deaths in Mosul, Bad Deaths in Aleppo
Said it around a month ago. Russia's victory in Ukraine has been so overwhelming that in their strategic retreat they decided to leave surplus weapons for the defeated Ukrainians.
Really good article from the Atlantic discussing why Russian strategic decisions keep backfiring. Russia Just Showed Why It’s Floundering in Ukraine
And don't forget, only a couple of the fixed-wing aircraft lost in Iraq (the only war close to the current military) were due to enemy fire. Most were lost due to maintenance problems, weather, and things like pilot disorientation. And that is out of tens of thousands of missions. I've pointed this out to Comrade in a previous post, but he's a slow learner. Compare it to Russia, who is mostly scared to fly missions over Ukraine. They do not do a lot of bombing of enemy positions, support of ground troops, etc. They sometimes fire missiles from a distance. The air war is mostly fought with drones. The U.S. air forces were at least ten times as active in Iraq as Russian air forces are in Ukraine. The U.S. leads their attacks with fixed wing aircraft, knocking out communications, command headquarters, and anti-aircraft defenses. The Russians might be fighting with one hand tied behind their back considering their lack of air combat, but that is because Russia is scared to be more involved. The danger from both SAM missiles and Ukrainian aircraft is too great.
They are so overwhelming superior they took pity on Ukraine by becoming their biggest supplier of arms.
Here is a strange story: Russia has arrested eight people in connection to the attack on the bridge to Crimea. Five of the suspects are Russian. Also, Russia is convinced it is a bombing attack, not a missile attack. Russia's FSB arrests eight for Crimean Bridge bombing
The age of the kamikaze pilot determines whether the ship he hits is a flagship? Do you even know what a flagship is? Keep guessing. And try not to hit yourself in the head--you'll make yourself dizzy. Most of the U.S. ships sunk in WWII by kamikazes were smaller ships, like corvettes and destroyers. The larger ships were more heavily defended and more able to withstand attacks from kamikazes. There is a reason that losing the Moskva was a major blow to Russia--it was one of only two flagships in their entire fleet. It is almost as embarrassing as losing their aircraft carrier (which is an out-dated piece of junk that usually needs to be towed to its next destination). Here is the summary of the 37 U.S. ships sunk by kamikaze attack: 18 - destroyers 07 - landing ships 06 - cargo ships 03 - escort carriers 01 each - destroyer escort, minesweeper, and tanker 0 - fleet carriers 0 - battleships 0 - heavy cruisers 0 - light cruisers Category:Ships sunk by kamikaze attack - Wikipedia Remember that the U.S. had a couple dozen fleet carriers in the Pacific at the end of WWII, and none were sunk by kamikazes.
The bridge is a military target if it's being used for transporting weapons and supplies to the Russian army. There's nothing wrong with destroying military targets.
“None of this would be happening if this proxy war was as just and righteous as its proponents are pretending. If your proxy war demands nonstop perception management at maximum aggression to manufacture public consent for it, your proxy war is probably immoral and bad. If maintaining public support for a proxy war requires nonstop PR spin, aggressive propaganda from the mainstream news media, banning of Russian media, and giant troll information ops amplified by think tanks and government agencies, it probably shouldn’t have public support.” A Good And Righteous Proxy War Wouldn’t Need Such Cartoonish PR
