Russian draftees are apparently being given rifles as old as 1959, so there is some truth to the suggestion that they are working with rusted rifles. UK intel says Russia is rushing reserve troops into battle with 'barely usable' rifles, creating a new kind of headache for Putin's generals
yes, special forces troops trained by America but left behind in Afghanistan who felt betrayed for being elft behind to a corrupt gubmnt that left town
Russia out of weapons, except old rusty rifles, flagging morale, fleeing on bicycles, somehow Ukraine can’t advance.
Still curious what happened to them. Had always heard that the Afghan army was nowhere near the 300,000 force but that there were 20,000 special forces trained that would fight to the end and could hold Kabul. And then none of that occurred. Probably explained by the fact that the government they were going to protect cut their deal. But it was at least a plan. Everything I read was always that the special forces understood that the US was getting now and that they were the last line and could hold Kabul and protect the government
I only scanned that but I didn't pick up the answer from my scan. That looked like it addressed the northern militias. To me that was different from the formally trained Afghan Army special forces that were supposed to defend the government around Kabul. Maybe I misread. I recall that they were about 20,000 in number. Going from memory. I posted it somewhere here at the time but I won't remember well enough to remember search terms to find
Biden snaps at Zelensky. Tells him to show a little gratitude ... Biden lost his temper on a call with Zelenskyy when Ukraine's leader asked for more aid
Meanwhile, looks like another Russian General is canned for all the glorious successes in Ukraine. LOL
I don’t know, brother. All I know is I wake up every morning to reports of new missile strikes decimating Ukraine. I don’t believe it will dent the will of the Ukrainian soldiers and people, but it may still lead to their demise. The numbers favor Russia, which is why I’ve always been skeptical of the reports of missile supply running low. These people have more nuclear warheads than we do, but they spent their missile supply in two weeks?
decimating Ukraine is a bit of overstatement and missile attacks have been ongoing for over 8 months.
...and, what do the number of long range nuclear missiles have to do with their short range conventional inventory?
Exactly. Even the most damaged cities in Ukraine are nothing like the German cities that were bombed into submission in WWII. Cologne (or "Koln") was 94% leveled by 1945. I don't think any Ukrainian city has seen devastation approaching 25% yet.
Ukraine's advance has slowed, but I think that is mainly because of the barrier troops forcing the Russian front line troops to stay on the front lines. Ukraine used to chase the fleeing Russian troops, and now they have to stop and kill large numbers of Russians. Obviously, they will cover ground more slowly if they have to stop every 50 yards and kill more Russians. Ukraine said they killed about 650 Russian troops yesterday. If they keep that up, that's 20,000 soldiers a month.
I wasn't comparing tactics. I was comparing levels of devastation of cities. The technology is available today to make missiles more destructive than the bombs used in WWII, but the industrial war machine was cranked up and the commitment to destroy those cities was much greater (the willingness to risk losing airplanes was also higher). Putin seems to be using missiles against cities for a terror effect more than anything else. In WWII, the allies were trying to make absolutely sure that Germany could not continue supporting the war by manufacturing parts for aircraft, tanks, etc.
Wow, it’s really telling how defensive folks get when facts are pointed out. This thread reads a lot like the pro-Napier, he’s the best recruiter ever type posts I see streaming on the football forum. It doesn’t make you pro-Russia to point out these missile attacks have done a number on Ukrainian infrastructure. The coordinated missile attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure did not really begin in earnest until Ukraine blew up the bridge to Crimea. They were in direct response to that event. That didn’t start 8 months ago. There are several posters in this thread whom refuse to acknowledge any Ukrainian losses or setbacks. It’s as if you’ve been shamed into thinking pointing out Ukrainian setbacks is somehow tantamount to being pro-Russia. Or if you point out any Napier shortcomings, you’re somehow not a real Gator. The utter tribalism on this forum is embarrassing. We can hold an intelligent conversation about the war without clinging to emotional takes that don’t jive with reality. I’m all for Ukraine prevailing. Central to that goal is not ignoring what’s actually happening in Ukraine.
