re: Latest Updates: Russia-Ukraine Conflict.

1 Russian Soldier takes out 5 Ukrainian Soldiers

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

Zelensky showing the world his version of Democracy and Religious Freedom

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

Another day, another Russian pipeline pumping station hit. It's hard to manage a war like this...

More video on the fire at Novosibirsk. It seems to be a long way from Ukraine -

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

fire at Novosibirsk. It seems to be a long way from Ukraine -

---

It's a long way from anywhere...

quote:

---

I didn't say they did have government help

---

I can read, but a lot of others did.
They were backing Seymour Hersh. It was all over the PT board.

quote:

---

That's the thing that should worry people. Right now Russian and Ukraine are the only countries that have experience fighting a true modern peer to peer conflict. The last time most other countries had experience with this was in WW2. As bad as Russia has done they are learning lessons and getting experience that other countries don't have. If they learn from it and actually change the way they do things based on it then they could actually be what people thought they were before the war with Ukrain

---

I see what you're getting at, but that's not true. NATO"s leadership has fought 3 force-on-force wars in the past 35 years and are combat experienced in ways the Russians still aren't. We were so successful in the force-on-force aspect of those wars that people just forget about them - it was the insurgency wars we struggled in, and I've argued to senior leadership we aren't fundamentally built to fight such wars.

But the issues run deeper. They Russians aren't learning - that's the key thing here.

The Russians haven't gotten around to learning even the basics of combined arms, or developed an NCO corps, or updated and improved their logistics, or rooted out corruption and cronyism throughout their military. They haven't improved their leadership, refined their bombing list for their stupid and cruel bombing and drone raids, or improved on their own technology. Just the opposite, they've gotten worse.

And what they have done is exposed just how corrupt, just how incompetent, just how myopic, and stupid, and lazy they are, all at a cost that I don't think anybody can truly understand.

Their infantry continues to be nothing more than 'blokes with guns.'
Their navy continues to be nothing more than sitting ducks in the water, only capable of getting off a few Kinzel missels against civilians. Again, the Russian Navy is losing to a country that doesn't have a navy.
Their Air Force STILL hasn't gotten air superiority in this war and now it's too late. The Ukrainian pilots have shown to be superior before they got F-16's and now the gap is going to get bigger. God Help the Russians if they are forced to go up against an F-35 or even a state-of-the-art Gripen.

THEY ARE USING DONKEYS FOR LOGISTICS AND HORSE CAVALRY FOR GOD'S SAKE.

NATO think tanks have apparently run the numbers of what would happen if Russia and NATO were to actually go at it and right now the kill ratio is expected to be in the area of 1000-1 in NATO's favor, and as wild as that seems they aren't crazy. What is keeping the Generals and people-in-the-know up at night isn't if we would lose, it's if that overwhelming victory happens and the Russians start to consider going nuclear just to save face. This seems extreme, but it's on the table and the Russian leadership hasn't made a single sane, smart choice once in this war.

quote:

---

It's where at least 40% of scientific advancement in the USSR came from.


Do you have a legitimate source for that?

---

Here's one, from the Wilson Institute, an American Research Institution out of DC:

Ukraine Nuclear History in the USSR

I don't know if it was 40%, but from what I could find it has repeatedly been described as 'central' to the USSR's weapons program, whatever that means.

Yeah, I'm going with the Persian Gulf War because it was a 'peer' war with Iraq having the 4th largest Army in the world on the defense. But I understand why it's not 'modern' in that sense.

But understand - that goes both ways.

The weapons the Russians have used in this war are of the Persian Gulf War era. We have not seen their Felon Fighter Jet, or the T-14 Armada, or the Terminator in any real numbers, or any of their 'advanced' weaponry that kept us up at night worrying, and if they haven't shown them so far, I say they don't have them or have them, at least not in significant numbers. I might be wrong - again, the Russians might be that stupid - but the Russians can't bring up a tank from the 1960's they haven't come close to maintaining properly to use against a NATO tank built in the 1990's or 2000's with NATO required modern upgrades and call that Russian tank 'modern' or 'peer.'

As such, NATO going up against Russia will not be a 'peer' adversary in a single way. Not size, not weapons, not manufacturing capability - nothing. Even if the US decides to sit this one out, which I hope we don't do, the Europeans are in a position to crush the Russians in every possible way. They just have to get their sh!t together, and they will.

I argue the Russian experience works against them. I argue that running bodies up against under supplied Ukrainian defense positions and taking a few meters a week has taught them that you might win a war that way. Let me be clear about this:

It will not work against NATO.

They couldn't even re-take a Russian village doing this, there's no way in hell they'll take an Estonia, much less a Poland, with this nonsense. So I don't think their experience is an advantage, I think it's lulled their stupid, greedy, myopic leadership into believing it's a proper way to fight a war when it's absolutely not.