Comments by "David Ford" (@davidford3115) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1. They tried. But much like a Soviet election, the people who count the votes are more important than what the actual tally was.
    7
  2. Oryx visually confirms the losses they report. They geolocate photographs to confirm that a particular piece of equipment is NOT double counted. If anything, Oryx UNDER reports losses.
    6
  3. Because the people who advocated mass tank battles haven't read Heinz Guderian's book, "Achtung Panzer". Guderian said that tanks should ALWAYS be escorted by an infantry platoon.
    5
  4.  @robinx961  Massive Tank on tank battles are as Soviet Red Army wet dream. Even Heinz Guderian, the father of tank combat, never advocated for that instead arguing that EVERY tank needed an infantry squad escorting it.
    4
  5.  @tristanyoung9673  Nice chronological snobbery. You know why people still read Sun Tzu? Because his observations on warfare are still true today. It is also the same reason why Carl von Clausewitz is still studied. Perhaps YOU should pick up the book "Achtung Panzer" and learn what combined arms is. Nothing that Guderian wrote about has lost its value over the years. And people like you are only going to prove him correct by ignoring it.
    3
  6.  @taoliu3949  Nice apples to oranges false analogy. The Kharkov front is NOTHING like the Zaphoresia front. For one, Ukraine has been forbidden to attack anything on Russian soil, which means they HAVE to let the Russians onto their soil before they can even counterattack. They basically used Paul von Hindenburg's strategy used on the Eastern Front in WW1. "It's not wrong if it works?" Tell that to the Kamikaze pilots of the IJN in WW2. Tell that to the IJA soldiers who engaged in Banzai Charges. Don't conflate "works" with "effective". The two are NOT the same.
    3
  7.  @ericp1139  How much French land did Germany occupy in WW1 before they lost?
    2
  8. Perun dug into the Turtle tank argument. His contention is that these "turtle tanks" are not actually doing the mission of a MBT, but rather as glorified assault sheds for clearing trenches.
    2
  9. Advances to nowhere with no clear objective.
    2
  10.  @taoliu3949  It is easy to build tanks. It is hard to train tank crews. Hence why the West puts such a premium on crew survival. Conversely, the Soviets viewed life as cheap and tanks and their crews to be expendable. And we are seeing the results of that philosophy in the Ukraine war. Don't fall into the flawed logic of the USSR's "Deep Battle" theory.
    2
  11.  @taoliu3949  Except, the data doesn't show that. Soviet Tanks used against Western tanks, particularly the "Super Sherman", in the Six Day war and the Yom Kippur War prove otherwise. I am not wrong; you are simply spewing wishful thinking.
    2
  12. As "assault sheds", sure. But they are not doing the role of an MBT.
    2
  13.  @fpxy00  What NATO army? They can't even beat the Ukrainian Soviet Army augmented with western equipment.
    2
  14. As an "assault shed" for tanking trenches? Sure. But for its primary purpose as an MBT? Hardly.
    2
  15.  @taoliu3949  Just because you breach doesn't mean you are doing it correctly. And with Russia, if there is a wrong way of doing it, you can assume they will pick the most wasteful option. The Russia MoD troops may adapt in the field, but their leaders are still ideologically welded to flawed Soviet doctrine regarding combat. Contrast that with the flexibility of the Ukrainians who are NOT employing the ad hock modifications that the Russians employ.
    2
  16.  @taoliu3949  Win the battle but lose the war. INDIVIDUALLY the Kamikaze MIGHT have been more effective, but taken as a whole, they were WORSE than trained pilots. And you still failed to address the fact that the goal of the Kamikaze was to slow the American advance, which it failed to do. Seriously, you are embarrassing yourself with how you are grasping at straws. NOBODY who is honestly assessing the Kamikaze considers it to have been a success. Same with the Banzi Charges.
    2
  17.  @taoliu3949  It wasn't the Solomons that destroyed Japanese Aviation, but rather the Battle of Midway where they lost 4 Fleet Carriers and most of the pilots with them (called the five minutes of fate). It could also be said that the Battle of Coral Sea also contributed greatly to attritioning Japanese Aviation. Further, the organized Kamikaze units didn't get deployed until the Philippine Campaign, with Lt. Yuko Seki's unit attacking the Jeep Carriers off Samar being their first major deployment. The fact that you got that wrong shows you have no idea what you are talking about. As far as the attacks on oil refineries, what part of PARTISANS do you not understand? Many of those targets are well out of range of domestic Ukrainian weapon systems launched from Ukrainian soil. Hell, most of the attacks in Crimea have been partisan actions. It has only been since the deployment of Storm Shadows and the accompanying MGM-140 ATACMS that Ukraine has had systems that could reach Sevastopol from Ukraine controlled areas (naval sea drones not withstanding).
    2
  18.  @lobster8009  And how many more T-series tanks have been destroyed? Your argument can't see the forest for the trees/
    2
  19. I tend to agree. China has decided that they know they cannot surpass the US's technological edge. So, they will try to reach a certain threshold where numbers can make up for the deficiencies in technological edge.
    2
  20. Numbers can defeat technological edge. The F-35 is what the F-4 Phantom was in Vietnam: master of none, sucks at everything. With only 6 rails on a stealth fighter, they cannot compete against 4th generation with 20 hard points. Hell, there was a Red Flag exercise where an F-16 killed several F-35s revealing to the Pentagon that they made the very same blinders that were made with the F-4 Phantom (why do you think Red Flag is even held?).
    2
  21.  @ericp1139  How much did the Russians control in the 1980s? We can go back and forth all day private conscriptovich.
    1
  22.  @attilamarics3374  25% kill rate is considered terrible and would immediately be removed from the inventory. You are just parroting Kremlin talking points.
    1
  23.  @attilamarics3374  Again, I seriously doubt that was a real study but rather some hearsay and scuttlebutt. Such failure rates would never be approved for use on the battlefield, and certainly not at the expense that a Javelin costs. Those targeting sensors are too valuable for that level of failure.
    1
  24. I think Ukraine has already factored that into their deployments. The fresh recruits back from basic training in Poland are likely manning and further training in the trenches along Belarus learning the ropes before being sent to the Eastern Front.
    1
  25.  @privatebandana  Considering that Oryx geolocated the pictures to confirm that they are actual kills and not duplicates or from Syria or Chechnya Wars, I think the burden of proof is on you, and you have failed to meet it.
    1
  26.  @Lipi19821  Soviet Pravda used "fact checkers", and yet people in the USSR still knew that Prava told nothing but lies (vranyo). Your "Western Fact Checkers" such as Snoops have been proven time and again to be wrong, often mischaracterizing the question to push an ideological goal. They were recently forced to admit that the Ashley Biden diary was real. Same with Hunter's Laptop. In short, if you have to use "fact checkers", then you are already proven to be a propagandist. The truth doesn't need to be "fact checked" as it can stand on its own.
    1
  27. Let us hope so, because the J-16 was purposely designed to be a 4th generation hunter of 5th generation F-22 Raptors. They planned on using numbers to defeat the American technological advantage.
    1
  28.  @FeatheredDino  MiG-29 has the worst record of all? Apparently, you are not familiar with how it is SUPPOSED to be used (which the Russians are terrible at). In engagements of less than 5km separation, the MiG-29 is VASTLY superior in terms of maneuverability and targeting. The problem is that it does NOT have the staying power nor stand-off capabilities of the F-15. Most Western fighters are predicated on the doctrine of distance fighting, not dogfighting at close range. The whole reason for the Red Flag exercises is to prevent the atrophy of those skills which would otherwise be ignored because of Western Chauvinism towards close aerial combat. Vietnam's air campaign highlighted that critical weakness in Western Air doctrine.
    1
  29. Perun calls them "assault sheds".
    1
  30.  @daivdsmith3746  We are only able to say that because the Russian Air Force turned out to be a joke. Before the War in Ukraine, NOBODY discounted post-Soviet equipment from the Communist world.
    1
  31.  @elmohead  Forgotten the Chinese invasion of Vietnam in the 1980s? China is not the peaceful country to pretend it is.
    1
  32.  @iplaygames8090  Advisors are not the same as combat troops genius.
    1
  33.  @taoliu3949  And yet Western tanks PRIORITIZE crew survivability while Soviet T-series never did. Just because the T72s had higher survival rates does NOT mean that it was a priority. Your claims that it was better than the west is pure propaganda. I am reading Steven J Zaloiga's Tank books as well as John Milsom's book "Russian Tanks 1900-1970" if you are looking for a source for my information.
    1
  34.  @taoliu3949  Survivability of the tank is not the same as survivability of the crew. And THAT is where you are moving the goal posts.
    1
  35.  @jkl9984  A Main Battle Tank needs its turret to have wide swivel range. Turtle Tanks don't have that. A Tank needs to be able to maneuver quickly. Turtle tanks sacrifice that for armor. It no longer even classifies as a traditional tank and is more like an Assault Gun such as the Sturmgeschütz III. Those are NOT tanks and should never be used as such. Girls Und Panzer treating it as one is anachronistic.
    1
  36.  @worldwar208  Yes, they ignore visual evidence if it is the same tank they have already counted but from a different angle. They Geolocate those photos to make sure there is not duplications in the counts. If anything, Oryx UNDER reports the loss numbers for both sides.
    1
  37. The American populace who is paying attention is not buying the bravado and pompousness of either Congress or the panty waste generals in the Pentagon. For years folks who follow geopolitical issues have warned about American Air supremacy being eroded by foolish decisions such as Robert Gates cutting the F-22 raptor fleet to HALF of what the USAF at the time said it needed to maintain dominance. But the generals and Admirals who followed the likes of Norton Swartz cared more about getting promotion than doing their actual job.
    1
  38. Simple. The Taliban and Al Qaeda had NO air support. No air cover. No Air Force, PERIOD. Don't conflate the ground battle incompetence with the air campaign. The A-10 warthogs were the ones getting the confirmed kills.
    1
  39. Turning Russia into a serious threat? The Russian deep material reserve is being burned away. Russian's air power can't compete against the patriot systems. They are relying more and more on T-72s and T-62s because the T-80 is going extinct and they can't produce T-90s fast enough. The Russian Bear is Geriatric!
    1
  40.  @Ranyick  I don't consider these things to be tanks anymore. It is the Kremlin shills with delusions of Stalin's massive battles that are making that claim.
    1
  41.  @tristanyoung9673  I don't need to be. I just need to be willing to depend on the wisdom of people who have learned lessons the hard way and trust that experience. You might try doing the same. "By three methods we may learn wisdom. First, by reflection, which is noblest, second, by imitation, which is easiest, and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” – Confucius
    1
  42.  @taoliu3949  Russian Partisans allied with Ukraine are NOT Ukraine itself. That is where you are intellectually dishonest. Right there you discredit anything else you have to say. But I will still address the rest because it amuses me to do so. Ukraine DOES have Defensive positions otherwise Russia would already be on the outskirts of Kharkiv, ready to assault the city like they did with Sievierodonetsk, Lysychansk, Bakhmut, or Advika. They are not. And that is because there ARE defensive positions, though I grant they are not as extensive as they COULD have been. Again, you are showing intellectual laziness and dishonesty. Nice job trying to rewrite history. The Kamikaze and Banzai charges were acts of desperation by an opponent that had already lost. As far as achieving their goal, well, the battle of Iwo Jima where Banzai Charges were forbidden stands in stark contrast to Saipan, Attu, and Makin Island. The Kamikaze attacks were supposed to check American advances, but they failed to do so. The loss of the USS St Lo and the USS Franklin stand as the high watermark for Kamikaze which is pathetic when you account for the thousands of attempts. American adaptation quickly rendered the tactic pointlessly futile. Stop trying to rationalize (ie making excuses fallacy) ineffective tactics. It only makes you look foolish trying to justify the indefensible.
    1
  43.  @taoliu3949  Aircraft is not the same as PILOTS. Major difference. Coral Sea Japan lost at least 90 veteran aviators to 35 Allies aviators. As pointed out elsewhere, equipment is easy to replace, but PEOPLE are hard to replace. While Zuikaku and Shoukaku along with numerous light carriers, their pilots were considered third tier to the First and Second Carrier Divisions which were wiped out at Midway. You are looking only at equipment, not personnel which makes ALL the difference. Again, those are significant distinctions which you blatantly ignore. And you are cherry picking your information regarding the deployment of Kamikaze. The suicide runs of pilots such as Lt. Fusata at Pearl Harbor is NOT Kamikaze. That is where you are once again being intellectually dishonest. It also shows that it does NOT in fact support you but rather contradicts what you claim. The drones used to attack oil refineries don't have the ranges you think they have. They MUST be launched from Russian soil by partisans behind the lines to reach their targets. Again, you are NOT giving the full context but cherry picking your data and ignoring the details which contradict your claims. And your last statement shows complete incoherence. Zelensky being vague and cagey does NOT confirm anything and does NOT constitute admitting responsibility in any way. You clearly have been watching too much MSNBC where they think guilt is assumed until proven otherwise. Those strikes are "plausibly deniable"; hence they are not directly under the control of the UAF.
    1
  44.  @taoliu3949  While there is correlation, it is NOT a one-to-one ratio as you fallaciously imply. Pilots can survive a crash or land a plane that would otherwise never fly again. Again, you are being disingenuous. Further, not all pilot and aircraft losses are the same. Japan did NOT rotate its pilots the way the US did, which means that your core elites were obliterated FIRST. That means smaller losses early on are more devastating than lagers losses later. Hence earlier engagements are more significant to the outcome than later ones. In that, the Russian MoD is experiencing the exact same problem. Again, just because Zelensky mentioned those attacks doesn't automatically mean he is responsible. Stop lying about that. It is the same false logic behind claiming that Trump is directly responsible for Michael Cohen's actions. STAND ALONE COMPLEX. Look that up. "Oh, would someone rid me of this troublesome priest?" Look that one up too.
    1
  45.  @taoliu3949  Did you not heard the part about a pilot surviving where the aircraft does not? At Coral Sea, the US lost 69 aircraft but only 35 pilots, clearly disproving your one-to-one ratio. Yet again you show a lack of abstract thinking. Correlation does NOT equate to causality. Both to pilot loss and to the oil refinery attacks. You are only showing your ignornace. "Better people THINK you a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt," -Samuel Clemens, aka Mark Twain.
    1
  46.  @tristanyoung9673  Nice ad hominin (logical fallacy). Try actually making a point instead of engaging in gutter-sniping. Also, "War never changes, its exactly the same, no matter which era it happens on," -USS Enterprise, Azur Lane the Animation.
    1
  47.  @tristanyoung9673  Did you leave your brain in Oz, or did Dr. Ben Carson remove it for you? Yes, I can engage in such childish volley of insults too. LEARN TO DEBATE. And touch grass while you are at it.
    1
  48. When talking about fuel consumption, do keep in mind that jet fuel has a higher octane which means you can go father distance and idle the engine longer on one liter of jet fuel as compared to one liter of diesel.
    1
  49.  @attilamarics3374  Israel has had to protect their tanks from RPG-7s and they don't use these turtle tan designs, though they DO use the slat armor cages.
    1
  50.  @attilamarics3374  Except it doesn't. Slat armor and turtle tanks are NOT the same thing. You are moving the goal posts.
    1