Comments by "Roman Kovalev" (@romankovalev7894) on "Lessons learned from armored assaults in Ukraine" video.

  1. ​ @poil8351  I will add that half of the command was bought and the weapons are outdated. The same T72s were not Russian, but Polish, and they are much worse armor. Saddam did not have an army, in fact, but an armed people.
    2
  2. Nobody helped Iraq. The United States before the operation (according to Candoliza Rice) several races asked Russia if it would help its former ally. And only after the response of the United States began the operation. The United States has learned the lessons of the past well. Vietnam, where they were stuffed on the cheek, and even a conflict with India, where the coalition was put in cancer. And there is no need to beat the weak Iraqi army with either strength or intelligence. It's like the Italians fought in Africa in World War II - there are a lot of people and little sense. They do not want to fight and surrender by the thousands. The United States has never fought a serious adversary. Because they are very sensitive to losses
    2
  3.  @franzxaverjosephconradgraf6850  Dude. This is a new generation war. And the Soviet defense doctrine was vulnerable. No one in the world has combat experience in such a war. That is why now the military experts of all the top countries are closely following the events in Ukraine. No country in the world will repel a massive missile strike mixed with drones and decoys. The anti-missile does not care - it will aim at the nearest target. The role of tanks has decreased a little more. FPV drones are working and the dangerous first line is now 50-100 km. Self-propelled guns and tanks are being hunted like Turks. Remote mining systems, electronic warfare and signal suppression systems. Strikes for a thousand kilometers. Marine drones. The list of what is used for the first time is far from complete.
    2
  4.  @imscary2  From what I listed earlier, there were only blows per thousand kilometers. subsonic cruise missiles. And obviously not in such quantities. And perhaps some primitive radio-controlled marine drones were used. This is all And the United States themselves launched rockets. And they did not participate either in repelling massive missile attacks or in organizing repelling attacks with their proxies. They have experience in dealing with SCAD with their full air superiority. It's a ballistic missile if anything. The whole doctrine of US military operations is tied to air superiority 😉
    2
  5. ​ @amazin7006  Zelensky puppet with the US hand in the ass. And it's popular in the west. Yes. Everyone laughs at his sweaty T-shirt and world tours in search of money and weapons. He needs to play his part. There was a photo recently where he stands sadly alone at the summit and is not needed by anyone. And everyone around is talking and laughing. He will be thrown out as a used condom and most likely killed. He knows a lot about the "affairs" of the Biden family.
    1
  6. ​ @Vexas345  Are your friends laughing at your stupidity? 🤣🤣🤣 Everything is fine with you in the text, Russia that invaded not knowing that it could win both the strength of the army in terms of the number of military personnel and the top army of the world in Iraq. Let's start. Defeating Russia at the current level is not possible, this is clear to everyone except idiots. Now is not the 90s when the USSR collapsed and the Russians are starving, and not the 20s of the last century when there was a civil war. At a certain stage of the escalation, the Russians will recognize the most Russophobic country in the West as a full-fledged participant in the conflict and will launch missile attacks on it. In response, including a nuclear strike near the country. Everyone in the West understands this and just shouts "no, no, we are not at war with Russia." Only the United States and the French have nuclear weapons in Europe. The French will not risk the country. For everyone else (Germany, Holland, Italy), nuclear weapons are antique bombs !!! mk61. Russia has hypersonic and supersonic missiles (from Kaliningrad to Britain in 8 minutes). Will the US respond with a nuclear strike in response to a strike near Britain? Don't think. They'll open champagne and make a lot of money doing it. They did this trick 2 times. And Europe will be forced to buy everything from the United States. The Russians thought NATO would fully enter and fight. Not Afghanistan - not logistics, but a dream, a common border with Poland, but NATO was scared. The Russian column on the way to Kyiv was a distraction. You crap began to transfer troops from the east of the country. This made it possible to occupy areas with a Russian population. Even your wiki does not write that the column was destroyed. They dissipated/evaporated. And now the Russians are calmly fighting, conducting exercises with the Chinese, striking at the Kurds, bending everyone in Africa, are present in Latin America - it's all at the same time. Have you decided to mobilize epileptics and tuberculosis patients in Ukraine? The potential is very different.
    1
  7. Yes, I do not argue.
    1