The Chinese government slapped him down pretty quickly, and his office said they were his personal views and not that of the government. He has had some other really controversial comments before, like saying after the Taiwanese were “re-educated” that they would be patriots again. Think he’s just one that doesn’t have a filter. Come to think of it, maybe he can replace Tucker!
Russia finally commits to using their latest tank in battle. The T-14 Armata, which Russia has only a few dozen of in battle-ready condition, strikes fear in the hearts of . . . Russians. Specifically, Russian troops are afraid to use it in battle. It has not been battle-tested, and has had a multitude of problems since it started production. Russia's new T-14 Armata battle tank debuts in Ukraine - RIA (yahoo.com) No word yet on whether combat medics will be forced to command the tanks.
An interesting article on how Putin built, and then destroyed, Russia's military. It covers the history of the Russian military from the collapse in the early 1990's to Putin's rebuilding it, to its destruction during the Ukraine War. It includes some detail about the invasion of Georgia. Because of Putin's personal interference in war plans, Russia did not even follow its own military doctrines during the Ukraine invasion. Its most elite units were destroyed very early in the war. Putin had put tremendous emphasis on the capabilities of his elite units over the years, and ignored the rest of his military. When the elite units were wiped out, Russia's army largely collapsed. The article makes clear that Putin expected no resistance from Ukraine when he marched on Kiev. A big part of that was his lack of military experience, and his attitude that modern war could be like wars fought in the 1800's--you put on a show of force, and the enemy calls it quits. How Putin spent 20 years rebuilding Russia's military 'and then just simply destroyed it' in Ukraine, according to an expert who watched it happen (yahoo.com) Re: the lessons learned from invading Georgia:
You can see how gung-ho our Pentagon is to send our latest, greatest F-35’s. Wouldn’t do for future sales to see them falling flaming from the skies.
Russia still losing 500 soldiers a day, according to the Brits. Putin needs to try to find them. They reduced their casualty rates by staying on the defensive since March. Russia is still losing 500 soldiers a day in Ukraine even after reducing its casualties by 30%, UK intel says (yahoo.com)
Not likely. The F-35's were flying around Ukraine at the outset of the war, and there was no evidence that Russian SAM units detected them. The only thing falling flaming from the skies is your Russian propaganda.
I’m very glad to hear it. We’ve gotten lots of priceless data out of Russia’s ill-considered war. But what we don’t have is what a Javelin does to a T-14.
Russian air force a non-factor in Ukraine: it's because of poor training and outdated equipment. Russian pilots are not trained in low-altitude flying, for one thing. Their aircraft are lacking modern sensors and instruments, for another. Poor training and outdated equipment left Russia's air force unable to help much in the invasion of Ukraine, study finds (yahoo.com)
I can smell a bounty for first documented hit on a T-14. Hopefully some saboteurs are out there waiting on some location intel
In reality, Ukraine is hemorrhaging. It is in the nature of attritional wars that at some point, the weaker side breaks and thereupon, the end comes very fast. This is how it was in Syria where — once the five-year old Battle of Aleppo was won in December 2016 — government forces swept through the country in a string of military victories bringing the curtain down on the conflict. War of Attrition in Ukraine at Tipping Point
Ukraine's Promised Counter Offensive Destined for Abject Failure - A Son of the New American Revolution
I despise US foreign policy. I don’t hate Russians. And using only Western sources and various other non-Russian sources I surmise that the US is losing another proxy war bigly.
...and then there are examples to the contrary, such as Afghanistan, Viet Nam (France), Russia itself (staving off Hitler/Germany, and Napoleon/France), South Korea (v. North), India/Pakistan and vice versa, Argentina (Brazil)... TBL, successful invasion most often relies on a swift capitulation by the defending country, most notably Poland capitulating in a matter of days, having been taken completely by surprise by Hitler's Blitzkrieg. That's what Putin banked on with Ukraine; he didn't figure on the determination of the Ukes. You seem to think that the longer this drags on, the more likely Russia prevails--conventional wisdom, per history, holds just the opposite. The longer it goes, the less likely Russia prevails.
btw, another point worth noting--when Russia succeeded in its defenses against france and germany, in both cases (especially v Napoleon), Russia kinda "rope a doped" the invading party. Ukraine appears to be doing some of that--let Russia in, wear itself thin...then pick it apart piecemeal, as Russia continues to bleed, just to hold on to meager gains. Time is Russia's worst enemy. They went into Urkaine because they needed its economic resources; not only are they not benefitting much from Ukes' resources....they're bleeding out trying to capture them. It's really been a quite pathetic look for the Red Army--which quite frankly, is looking rather more pink, than red.
