Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "" video.

  1. Ukraine has shown the stagnation of the Russian military and why militaries need to constant advance and not get comfortable with their level of equipment Case in point, The USAF landed MC-130s and AC-130s on roads as well F-35s to demonstrate their ability to operate anywhere Imagine how much differently the Battle of Antonov Airport would have played out if the Russian air force had the same capabilities as the USAF The losses of the MQ-9s over the red sea shows that MQ-9 has reached its obsolence and that stealthier assets like the MQ-20 are needed USAF demonstrated the QuickSink which was powerful enough to sink 40,000 ton LHA. Instead of having to use several missiles One LRASM to cripple the target followed by a few cheaper QuickSink Lastly, Russian EW has proved to be very effective , their one saving grace and has shown that destroying the jammer is far easier than trying to counter it
    4
  2. How about no There was no humiliation in Afghanistan The US had control of Afghanistan for the better part of 20 years and it became moot to stay any longer And how bad of price has Russia paid for that invasion
    2
  3.  @toasteroven6761  Again not economical to bring that equipment back. 1 C-5 can hold up 16 Humvees whereas Roll on/off ship can hold upwards of 8000 vehicles 1 C-5 can carry up 140 tons whereas ships can carry upwards of 400,000 tons its simple math The amount of flights needed to bring that stuff back completely was no worth the expense its economically feasible vs economically infeasible and there was no literally justification that would have made bringing everything back economically feasible Again economics not priorities. Wrong,the equipment stateside storage is in better condition than equipment that been sitting in Afghanistan for decades and that sells much better than trying to offer scraps from Afghanistan nevertheless, the Taliban got scrap from the US. There were several cases of equipment going missing hence the US never allowed Afghanistan to get any advanced from the or anyone else. They made sure that whatever they got, was not a gold mine. Case in point, Ukraine has handed over several highly advanced pieces of Russian equipment to the US. Most notably several pieces from Khibiny EWS ,Krasukha EWS fully intact Panstir S1 as well T-90s. That type of equipment is worth the expense to bring back due to its value, Afghanistan never gotten anything of value You are basically talking nonsense at this point its economically feasible vs economically infeasible The claim was made that US left billions of dollars of equipment behind but no one ever looked at what was actually left behind just heard a big number
    2
  4.  @toasteroven6761  Its called economical The majority of that equipment has been there for 20 years so there was no point in bringing back. More to the point, Taliban without any assistance has been forced to scrape most of it So the question what did they actual get and the answer is nothing The only failure was the Afghanistan military and president not heeding the US warnings
    1
  5.  @toasteroven6761  Again wrong Why bring back equipment that is of no further use Now if Afghanistan wasnt land locked and there was easy access to the sea, then US would chartered Roll-on/roll-off cargo ships and removed everything however The only access was via air and thats thousands of flights trying to remove equipment, its not worth the expense and again without US support, that equipment became most scrap. Case in point, the Iraqi military has access to substantial amounts of US equipment. F-16, M1A1s and so forth as well the ability purchase substantial equipment from other countries because there was no fear of it failing into the the wrong hands. Afghanistan on the other hand was severely limited in that area what is the most advanced that Taliban got from the US thats still operating , nada The US warned the Afghanistan military and president to change their tactics and not fight Taliban on such wide front anymore as the US would be no longer providing support for their operations Instead, they attacked and were easily defeated. So instead of consolidating their forces to protect their assets , they spread out and got smoked leaving no barrier between them and US forces who already started to draw down forces
    1
  6.  @bloodgout  Its not pure misinformation. he doesnt get what economically feasible vs economically infeasible means There is no why that US would pay price to bring back equipment thats being sitting over there for 20 years
    1
  7.  @toasteroven6761  Looks and priorities don't matter why spend millions on demilitarization cost when its easier to simply leave it behind You wanna spend million simply over look, did you literally just write that Deterrence doesnt need looks, it works on pure facts. The fact is that the US wasnt forced out ,they withdrew The justification for was over once Bin Laden was dead Secondly, till the US forces drew down,the Taliban never openly attacked conventionally as they knew the US would make quick work of any conventional attack Any attack was always asymmetric as the Taliban knew fully they stood no chance No so far all its been nonsense from you Russia's invasion has nothing to with Afghanistan pull out, Even it do, Russia has paid massive price for it The Red Sea Crisis only exists as the UN wants a peaceful resolution not an all out conflict All the UN has do so the word or the Houthi make a mistake and all bets are off
    1
  8.  @toasteroven6761  Right says the one that believes that the US should have spent billions recovering basically worthless gear just to perpetuate a an absurd facade Again Deterrence is facts not fiction Before advanced satellites and other ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) It was easy to perpetuate the appearance of strength because the enemy had no way to knowing Russia perpetuated itself as super power and 3 years later in Ukraine , that was proved to a myth With Afghanistan and Iraq The US proved its capabilities as they gained control both very quickly by doing what Russia cant seem to do
    1
  9. Sure says the guy claiming that the US should have wasted billions just for appearances Deterrence is based on facts not fiction
    1
  10.  @toasteroven6761  Again with the pure nonsense
    1
  11.  @toasteroven6761  The only person coping would there clueless one as you cant grasp simple economics and reality
    1
  12.  @toasteroven6761  Making fun of you is too easy there are entire graveyards of equipment in the pacific and even the EU from previous wars Perfectly fine equipment that was left as it made no sense to bring back Leaving equipment in theater is a practice that is centuries old Simple economics not worth the effort Deterrence is facts not fiction Before spy sats and ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) aircraft It was all guess work Today, its an exact science Russia's myth of super power has been shattered by 3 years of conflict while the US position has never been stronger and that reality is due the fact of US weapons proving their superiority over Russian weapons yet again
    1
  13. Making fun of you is too easy there are entire graveyards of equipment in the pacific and even the EU from previous wars Perfectly fine equipment that was left as it made no sense to bring back Leaving equipment in theater is a practice that is centuries old Simple economics not worth the effort Deterrence is facts not fiction Before spy sats and ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) aircraft It was all guess work Today, its an exact science Russia's myth of super power has been shattered by 3 years of conflict while the US position has never been stronger and that reality is due the fact of US weapons proving their superiority over Russian weapons yet again
    1
  14. ​ @toasteroven6761  There are entire graveyards of equipment in the pacific and even the EU from previous wars Perfectly fine equipment that was left as it made no sense to bring back Leaving equipment in theater is a practice that is centuries old Simple economics not worth the effort Deterrence is facts not fiction Before spy sats and ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) aircraft It was all guess work Today, its an exact science Russia's myth of super power has been shattered by 3 years of conflict while the US position has never been stronger and that reality is due the fact of US weapons proving their superiority over Russian weapons yet again
    1
  15. Before spy sats and ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) aircraft It was all guess work for deterrence Today, its an exact science Russia's myth of super power has been shattered by 3 years of conflict while the US position has never been stronger and that reality is due the fact of US weapons proving their superiority over Russian weapons yet again
    1
  16. Making fun of you is too easy there are entire graveyards of equipment in the pacific and even the EU from previous wars Perfectly fine equipment that was left as it made no sense to bring back Leaving equipment in theater is a practice that is centuries old Simple economics not worth the effort Deterrence is facts not fiction Before spy sats and ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) aircraft It was all guess work Today, its an exact science Russia's myth of super power has been shattered by 3 years of conflict while the US position has never been stronger and that reality is due the fact of US weapons proving their superiority over Russian weapons yet again
    1
  17.  @toasteroven6761  Russia's myth of super power has been shattered by 3 years of conflict while the US position has never been stronger and that reality is due the fact of US weapons proving their superiority over Russian weapons yet again
    1
  18.  @toasteroven6761  As yes the classic denial in fact of actual facts you got all the answers explain why Russia cant deal the after 3 years despite the fact Ukraine borders them
    1
  19.  @toasteroven6761  What you call answers is pure nonsense point blank
    1
  20.  @toasteroven6761  Hell even Turkey is willing to give up its S-400 now just get US made F-35 funny how that works
    1
  21.  @toasteroven6761  Nonsense no where in history has any military done the nonsense you claim because its exactly that nonsense
    1
  22. Having actual capabilities is cheaper Russia's failure at the Battle of Antonov Airport highlights this fact The CH-53E/K , MH-60 and MH-47 can aerial refuel while the Russian Mi-17 and Mi-26 can't So instead of arriving with full tanks, they came in fuel limited The CH-53E/K can carry the tactical bulk fuel delivery system (tbfds) which allows them to refuel both vehicles and aircraft While the other aircraft refuel in the air For AH-64 and A/MH-6 can land to waiting CH-53s with TBFDS and refuel More the point, the USAF would set up FARP/Staging site 50 miles away large enough for MC-130 to land with armor Lastly, instead of striking precisely, the KA-52 was running and gunning 3 years later, KA-52 losses are over 60 and only dropping because they using the LMUR missile more and strike from long range instead getting up close were Ukrainian forces have been able to deal with them Lastly, Russia's saving grace has been its EW but also its curse because it shows thats it far easier to destroy the jammer than counter it
    1