Comments by "Kevin Smithwick" (@KSmithwick1989) on "Ukraine Sacrifices LAST Reserves on a TINY Village" video.

  1. ​ @jordonstewart2092  It's in regards to Javelin strikes. Those cages were initially claimed to stop them. Although heavy tandem-charge warheads go through them. That said, they're still relatively useful against drone dropped AT grenades. While reducing the effectiveness of FPV drones like Lancet. As it creates a stand-off distance from the EFP impact.
    14
  2. ​ @koromon007 Funny how the that artillery ratio is always dropping. Remember when it was 12:1 then 10:1 and now 8:1. Russia created that problem by firing to many shells. Which ended up destroying a lot of gun barrels and the recol systems.
    9
  3. Who in Ukraine claimed this? Because Corps and Divisions were phased out in the 2000 millitary reform. You're talking about structures that haven't existed in over 20 years. I wonder who was ignorant enough to up vote your comment.
    4
  4. So, is the joke suppose to distract from the fact the Russian moon lander crashed. 😂
    2
  5. Except there was some merit to the "running out of missles" story. Russia was outpacing production, which led to reduced use. That's one of the reasons hypersonic missles are now often used only in retaliatory strikes. They are pooling reserves for strikes, rather than continously using them on targets of opportunity. As there is low production capacity for the more advanced/expensive systems.
    2
  6. @zartic4life  Noticed that you ignored the main part that the advantage decreased from 12:1 to 8:1. There has been a -50% drop in artillery guns. Falling back on "overheating" is not as an excuse. As the concern is barrel wear, and there is an obvious bottleneck. As there is only one factory building replacements. Also it didn't help when Russia reintroduced older pieces from storage. As they don't use the same shell types. The standard 2A65 (MSTA-B) ammo is incompatible with the older D-20.
    2
  7. No Chieftain tanks were sent. Iran is the only country left operating them.
    2
  8. ​@tiagodagostini You're definitely not going to use a combine harvester to tow artillery. Have you even seen one drive on a road. It's like saying a zamboni is meant for artic warfare. 😂
    2
  9. ​ @eioclementi1355 Haha "robot village", I'm thinking about Futurama mow. 😂
    2
  10. Apparently, they are priced between $500-650m. Which is technically more, as the relative cost would be higher in Russia.
    1
  11. ​@@markaspen Hobestly that sounds a lot like the Russian ERA issue. Where captured Russian vehicles were missing the explosive charges inside. Because they were being stolen and sold. Stolen firefighting equipment also played a role in the sinking of the Moskva. It prevented the crew from containing the fire onboard.
    1
  12. ​ @MafiaBossGB You should have just typed it as Roskomnadzor. It's almost as you want to keep the name vague. If anything more Westerners should know about it. Because honestly it's no secret that Russian apologist always take refuge in people not knowing about Russia. They criticize the west about censorship, when Russia ironically has an entire government bureaucracy dedicated to it.
    1
  13. @thesaul9484  Yeah, the problem is that "random guys" can often mean state sponsored trolls. As we saw with Prigozhin's coup, there is definitely a massive operation. As most of the pro-Russian chatter suddenly stopped during the coup attempt. Far as we seen, there is really no reliable counter to top-attack ATGMs. I honestly have no doubt people were being paid to run counter narratives. Which quite honestly is pretty pointless, as it doesn't change the fact that tanks can be destroyed with impunity.
    1
  14. ​ @LordKurian  It still doesn't change the fact no details are given. What they said is true the Russian mainstream media doesn't either.
    1
  15. @rishbamiwhuruohna1349  Well, Prigozhin and Utkin are apparently dead. So much for your argument just 2 hours ago.
    1
  16.  @unclefester831  Correct, the auto-correct function messed up the spelling. Thanks for pointing that out.
    1
  17.  @rishbamiwhuruohna1349  You mean they are masters of tufta.
    1
  18. ​ @RealPolitik-dy4it  Better yet, why wouldn't Russia prepare for a swift victory. Especially considering the war has gone on for a year and a half. Also it's no coincidence that Russia had a massive helicopter assault on Hostomel Airport. Or sent a equally massive convoy to Kiev. It's pretty obvious that was there goal until it failed. Causing the Russian government to say they retreated in a "goodwill gesture".
    1
  19. ​@caramelstake9453 Yeah, and the Soviets were much more capable than modern Russia. It was a union of what is now 15 countries.
    1
  20. @blazer4999  How sure are you about those drones. Considering how much footage of FPV drones getting caught in camo nets. That one isn't even a partisan issue. Those drones are easy to counter in that respect. The soft impact prevents the fuse from detonating.
    1
  21. @zartic4life  No, you definitely got your terminology wrong. Ussally, the advantage is defined by known blue force artillery units versus estimated red force artillery. Separately, the advantage can be defined by the volume of fire. Which those ratios certainly don't represent. As Russia is not firing 8x more shells. Which would be a volumetric advantage, as opposed to a simple numeric advantage. How you ended up thinking it was defined by casualty projections is beyond me. Numeric and volumetric advantage is used, as it's significantly more reliable. The artillery arms role is not so much about casualties. But about fire sustainment and counter-battery fire. Which is where numeric and volumetric advantage come into play. As they are interrelated, given the number of guns plus logistical sustainment equals volume. Used to support the infantry in securing their objectives.
    1
  22. ​ @igorderka4960  So why didn't they just end this sooner. Considering they had a massive convoy outside Kiev. Then suddenly retreated to the east. Russia could have definitely saved themselves a year. If they just fought in Kiev and not run away.
    1
  23. @jozefhorniak8191  Right, so by your standards, who has more accurate numbers?
    1
  24. @jozefhorniak8191  Did he geolocate every unit, while filtering for doubles. And can you forward the video for confirmation.
    1
  25. You mean the main defensive line. Given the extensive stand-off zone itself is a defensive line. Calling it the "first" line is just a dumb talking point. Probably from some Russian that didn't know proper English grammar. As by definition the first static line of contact is the first defensive line.
    1
  26. @vlad_47  The forward zone in Soviet doctrine is called a security zone. Although Russia has already contradicted that doctrine by staying and fighting. Not to mention the. counter-attacks. That doctrine was never intended to be used as seen in Ukraine. As there is no Gulf War style armor attacks. Which undermined the purpose of building a security zone. Building a coherent 4th line would have been more appropriate.
    1
  27. @vlad_47  You keep mentioning Corps, even though they were phased out by Ukraine in the 2000 millitary reform. The same applies to Divisions, Brigades are now the largest formations. So I'm just wondering since you're the 3rd guy today to repeat that same mistake on this video. Is there some lazy troll campaign to pretend that Brigades are now magically Corps?
    1
  28. @vlad_47  Strange, considering the majority are Russian sources that say corps. Also as I mentioned, you're at least the 3rd account repeating the same comment, almost verbatim. You even tried changing the argument with a red herring message about casualties.
    1
  29. ​ @jennatolls9846  Funny that you outright say Russia is a mafia state. Then question what the West has to offer. When the real question is what does Russia have to offer its allies? You speak about multi-polarity when that wasn't even Russia, but was China. And even that was a half step, as China is really not that stupid. They simply want to emulate Western economic success on their own terms. Compared to the West and China, Russia objectively can't improve other people's live economically. As their GDP is smaller than major US states and EU members. While lacking a reserve currency. At best, Russia can become a Chinese proxy for resources. And prop up their own economy that way.
    1
  30. So what is the date and location of that quote.
    1
  31. Which is still part of the region Russia claimed to have annexed. By your standards it's so bad, then why is Russia fighting over it in the first place.
    1