Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Military Summary"
channel.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
@fryertuck6496 I wonder if it occurs to anyone in the West that a dispersed, reduced military in Ukraine was the goal, and the Russians aren't upset about the lack of targets. The Russians are obliged to stick and move. They can do amazing things with indirect fire, but they need a good spotter and they need to pick up and move in a short amount of time. It's the same for the FPV's, the camera-guided stuff. Russians are using small, light infantry drone operators.
I know we Monday morning quarterbacks should shut up about tactics, but someone with an endless supply of cheap drones might be able to change how wars are fought. If you can knock out a tank or artillery piece with a cheap suicide drone, that can be a game-changer. But tactics go out the window, when you can field orders of magnitude more men and munitions, any small tactical advantages are wiped out. Just looking at the troop and equipment build-up that started years ago and is now in high gear, it looks more and more hopeless for Ukraine and the stumbling and bumbling West. We're too many generations into taking our dominance for granted. The political class takes its privileges and its profits for granted, but reliance on finance and regulation, alone, without the resource and industrial base to back it is just a fart in the wind. The world is moving on without us. We need to get back to the basics of sound (limited) government.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gingerfox7143 That is how I see it, too. I think Ukraine forces are nearing the breaking point. They're giving as good as they're taking, but they're running out of men, equipment and ammo. They built up an enormous military, but the first year of the smo appears to have been aimed at luring UFA into costly exchanges that the UFA can win, but at a cost they can't afford. The first phase, Russia spent ammo like water, and tried to keep casualty rates low on their side and high on the Ukraine side.
With territory much more precious to Ukrainians, I think they threw themselves on the Russian sword many times and scoffed at "cowardly orcs" who fled in terror before them. But the more progress they made, the greater their losses, and the more effective the "inferior" Russian artillery became, the more the ground in front and on the retreat looked like a killing field or "meat grinder."
Over and over we saw this play out. Now we see the high-dollar precision weapons being used against logistics behind the lines, but they're expensive to launch, deplete (irreplaceable) stockpiles, and are too few to really overwhelm continuously improving air defenses. Western support is a genie with 3 wishes, and 2 wishes have been used up.
Now we appear to be at the stage where the Russian build-up is really kicking in, and they're probing more and more aggressively. Even if every probe is 'defeated' for the next month, I feel like we're nearing the point where the 'probes' will be reconnaissance in force against token opposition.
What happens then is anybody's guess, but I don't think Putin wants to blitzkrieg to Kiev. I think he'll just keep doing what he's doing, until someone with sense comes forward with acceptable terms. One way or another, Russia will have a next-door neighbor that is either friendly, or a hostile rump state that's too weak to constitute a serious military threat.
Ukraine and NATO had a great thing going in the post-$oviet world, but they just couldn't handle it. They couldn't subdue their own greedy, globalist oligarchs, and Russia did what it felt it had to.
Burisma is the poster child for influence-peddling and corruption at the highest levels in the West. The family most embroiled is in the White House, but there are many others and they're all regime-change racketeers and profiteers, in my opinion. This has been a farce from the start, and it appears that Putin is the only adult in the room.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1