Comments by "The SMR" (@SergyMilitaryRankings) on "HistoryLegends"
channel.
-
770
-
233
-
100
-
99
-
86
-
77
-
61
-
That's what people don't get about attritional wars, it looks like russian gains are pretty measly (and in manuvere warfare terms they are absolutely pitiful) but attritional wise. Ukraines losses are unsustainable.
Russia has no need to show off and want big pushes, they can just wait and let Ukraine exhaust themselves until they are at critical stage then Russia will launch a massive offensive.
But we also have to realise that whilst much of Ukraines pre 2022 military hardware is destroyed they have received over 2000 AFVs, nearly 3000 APCs, over 500 air defence systems, over 60 fighter jets, over 30 attack helicopters and this is all stuff delivered.
Then we have the new $60b, €20b and £1b in military aid that will be arriving soon (that will be spread out over 2-3 years) along with the €50b and $10b in financial aid that will be arriving. Combined with Ukraine constant mobilisations.
Yeah I honestly don't think this war is even close to being over, I'd say around 2026-2027 before russian victory That's if Ukraine doesn't surrender before then. I can see trump trying to broker a deal but honestly can't see zelensky or the EU and UK willing to make any concessions and even if US cuts off aid Ukraine still has EU, UK, NATO, Japan etc.
60
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
45
-
@sector986 tnam was a military and political failure regardless of how you look at it, the military failed to defeat the NVA and the US failed to stop communism spreading, same with Afghanistan, military failed to defeat the Taliban and failed to install a pro western government, Iraq was a military victory with a political failure.
That's false, first of all, if the US tried to invade Ukraine, Russia would enact mass mobilization of all its forces, they have far more anti air systems than is one the field, also Russia would transition to a war economy where majority of its industry would be used for war production.
There's 4 major military powers where if they faced eachother at full strength (mass mobilization/ war economy) they would have more or less equal chances, based on economic capabilities, production and logistics capabilities, military power and natural resources, they are the United States, Russian Federation, European Union and the republic of china.
If I had to pick one, I'd pick China, they have the biggest production capabilities, biggest logistical abilities, 2nd biggest navy, biggest army and are leading in many areas from military, economic, logistical and resource wise, different countries have different leads, for examples US has largest air force, most amount foreign bases and GDP nominal, Russia has largest number of tanks and Artillery, European Union has largest navy& land forces, China has largest army, largest foreign &gold Reserves and largest labour force.
I did an essay on this last year, describing what I call the 4 major military powers, in relation to economic power, military power, logistical abilities and natural resources, as they all matter in a countries ability to wage war.
43
-
It's amazing how people talk about losses, adviivka is probably the most heavily fortified town other than Kiev, it was the staging post of all offensive operations during Ukrainian rebellion in donbas, it has numerous defensive fortifications like bunkers, trenches, minefields, manpad stations, ATGM spots, SAM sites and radar installations, not to forget the constant reinforcements.
It's going to be a tough battle, so far Russia has only lost around 67-100+ tanks and IFVs and are close to completing their entrapment in north east region after only 12 days of fighting yet the way united24 and Ukrainian bootlickers are reporting you'd think they've lost thousands of tanks 😂
The same united24 that said Ukraine has destroyed 20,000 russian tanks 😂
43
-
41
-
40
-
36
-
34
-
32
-
31
-
30
-
25
-
23
-
21
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
16
-
15
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6