Comments by "Sean Cidy" (@seancidy6008) on "Alexander Mercouris" channel.

All the the training and equipment in the world will not alter the fact that this is not 1941, when the offence held a decisive advantage--for a time. There have since been eight decades of developing arms and tactics to stop combined arms offensives. There is now zero reason to expect trying the traditional breaching and exploitation by maneuver warfare elements against an opponent all set up and waiting with a full suits of modern countermeasures can result in anything but a snail's pace with huge casualties at best. And that goes for any army trying it; those operations simply do not work any more.
16
The key military reason for being defeated in Vietnam was America didn't declare national mobilisation and call out the reserves to smother the enemy with numbers. And the key reason for not taking the aforementioned steps was the US fear of China intervening as it had in Korea.
8
The US never expected or wanted Ukraine to succeed with the offensive, that would be too risky because Russia might panic and escalate to a level that will involve the US directly. No, the true objective of US assistance to Ukraine is by giving enough keep it in the game no matter what Russia does conventionally, the Kremlin will ultimately tire of continuing futile attempts to knock Ukraine out of the war, and ask for terms to cease hostilities.
6
The sending of low quality units into minefields is deliberate, a feature not a bug, and intended to clear those minefields one way or another.
5
There are vast supplies of every type of arms and ammunition stockpiled in Israel by the US and earmarked for any conflict in the area. Washington is worried that China might see it as opportune to move of Taiwan if the US was engaged, directly or indirectly, in the Middle East in addition to the Ukraine commitment.
3
While I like your take on the war and how it is going for Ukraine relative to Russia, you are wrong about what a country like Russia might consider an existential threat. Let us put how the war is actually going for Russia to one side. Now, assuming a hypothetical looming defeat for Russia, might their reaction be to think they are obliged to accept ( hypothetical remember) that they are a third rate country?; because that is what being defeated without daring to clearly threaten to use and then if ignored actually use some of the smallest types in their enormously expensive collection of various nuclear weapons against the conventionally armed medium sized country of Ukraine would amount to for Russia. To be clear Russia in this scenario would not be able to get Ukraine to surrender the land currently unoccupied by Russia; no, the most that would happen I think is Ukraine has to be satisfied with it being a somewhat smaller county. You have convinced me that Ukraine has serious problems but also has powerful weapons from foreign friends, strategic space, and potential mobilisation of getting on for a million men. Ukraine is losing men, but gaining territory. So if Zelensky is ruthless enough it is perhaps not out of the question that Ukraine ignoring nuclear threats and with a reequipped army might force Russia back to the 2014 borders.
3
@jesan733 As far as the cost of the arms yes agreed, but other economic consequences are less obvious, such as what currency Russia gets paid in for its energy sold to China. Dollars are no good to Russia now. That means they are increasingly less useful to China. America was closer to both Russia and China than they were to each other during the Cold War. The background is that production of the West was two to three times its share of world population for a century starting about 1880, but that is now well on the way to reversing.
3
I really cannot see the US army or airforce entering combat with the Russian army inside Ukraine. I agree that the American strategy is to proceed in 'boil a frog style', but with more and more effective arms supply, rather than joining in on the side of Ukraine. The Ukrainians can and will be given more and more devastatingly advanced firepower and real time targeting information the worse they are doing, and that is why Russia will be unable to get any momentum. In this war, Ukraine, Russia and America can all lose. China can't.
2
@retrocool Assange was in London for the lifestyle. Down under will be like a living hell for him,
2
The Ukrainians are using relatively disposable units (often with many ethnic Russians) in sequential attacks along the same axis. The objective is to clear a path through minefields one way or another, and also to locate enemy artillery. The real strike for will not be committed until there is a good prospect of complete breakthrough--if there ever is.
2
@vladoparenzan3344 Calling out the reserves is something that could be done as in addition to a draft, and would be many millions
2
Yes. Fortifications are underrated, and so are minefields. Time training is not the problem, nor is aircover. Those giving the Ukrainians training in achieving breakthrough are completely armchair: they have never actually did it, which air protection or without . All the the training and equipment in and aircraft in the world will not alter the fact that this is not 1941, when the offence held a decisive advantage--for a time. Eight decades of developing arms and tactics to stop combined arms offensives followed. Zero reason to expect traditional breaching and exploitation by maneuver warfare elements against an opponent all set up and waiting with a full suite of modern countermeasures (including anti aircraft missiles), can result in anything but a snail's pace advance with prohibitively huge casualties at best. And that goes for any army trying it; those operations simply cannot work any more.
1
Ukraine wants to bring the US into direct conflict with Russia. Tail wagging the dog.
1
You said at the time of the video with the pile of bodies he was showing signs of mental instability.
1
@edthebumblingfool But he has to spend the rest of his life in Australia now. He was in London and visiting Sweden for the lifestyle.
1
@righthand7965 Ha ha. He is never going to be let into Britain again.
1
He does nothing without being sure Putin approves; that is for sure.
1
Deafening Ukrainian fanfaronade about their imminent mighty offensive was quite possibly done with the intention of getting the Russians dedicating all their resources to digging in, thereby obviating any Russian attack. For all their US supplied intel omniscience, Ukraine is going to be tentative and probing, not throw its laboriously accumulated crack brigades at a Kursk style Russian defence so deeply echeloned
1
America could easily jam the Russian version of GPS and make all the missile guided bomb long range strikes cease. That it has not is like ATACMs being denied to Ukraine: an example of the many effective things thet could hamstring the Russians in Ukraine. America does not want escalation in case Russia does something 'irrational' (ie what the Kremlin from its point of view ought to, and probably would do if it could see into the future). Russia is a frog oblivious to the fact that it is being very subtly boiled according to a recent podcast interview with the Austrian Colonel Markus Reisner. He also says if Russia seems to be winning the heat will be turned up under it.
1
The Ukrainians have more precise targeting and counter battery artillery. The Russian use mass effect in artillery (as all else). So Wagner, which unlike the rest of Russian forces in Ukraine is actually advancing, might well need to fire an awful lot of ammunition. The Russian army is begining to use the assault group methods pioneered by Prigozhin ( also originated the troll farm that maybe tipped the balance preventing Clinton becoming president), so I can't see criticism by Prigozhin backfiring on him because he gets things done. Criticism of the army by Prigozhin is likely articulating what Putin feels, so the Wagner chief is quite possibly Putin's sockpuppet rather than a loose cannon. Anyway the army has traditionally had and been kept having zero influence in the highest political circles as far as I am aware. Progozhin is safe as long as he sticks to criticism of military figures. The evidence so far in Ukraine strongly suggests that combined arms mobile warfare just does not work very well any more. Wagner's methods are a refinement of the Russian army long favoured 'reconnaissance in force' tactic that 'soaks up firepower' by drawing it--with often incredibly bloody results. Progozhin's lifer expendables are tailor made for employing in such a manner. Add a second echelon of agile professionals using stealth and bazookas, and the tactics make excellent sense.
1
@enshk79 Armies were still expecting soldiers fighting from the back of horses with swords to have a role well into WW1, so actual combat showing up the ineffectiveness of tanks a hundred years later is par for the course. And it is not just tanks, there seems to be an assumption that F16 would shoot down Russian ground attack aircraft and then do airstrikes on the Russians defenders at critical points, but that is most unlikely. The smarms of drones are profoundly altering the usefulness of airpower, which also has to cope with manpads among ordinary infantry; given the Russian heritage of an extensive variety of long range anti aircraft missiles to fight against a strong airforce. modern air superiority planes almost a generation in advance of the F16 would be protecting the Russian ground attack aircraft. The survivability of F16s doing ground attack missions on a Ukrainian battlefield is very dubious The Ukrainians are not even at the first line of fortifications yet, and already went from fanfaronade to fiasco. Russia had a series of fiascos from trying to advance swiftly, and while they made mistakes in execution I think evidence for the effectiveness of combined (tanks, artillery infantry, and airstikes) arms to breach defences and exploit the breakthrough in a sustainable way is noticeably lacking considering now long the war has went on . Mines laid by artillery and drone observation of where to shoot the mines has wreaked havoc on both sides offensives in Ukraine and what can F16s or even F35s do about that?
1
@fatdaddy1996 Full on war between Russia and America is really most unlikely, although they both act as if fighting each other might be a serious an option the reality is the Ukraine conflict is as full on as it will ever get. There is now a lot of electronic warfare hamstringing US surveillance and even the best intel cannot create weak points on the line. There just aren't any inadequately held parts if the line and behind it without reserves like there were last year for Ukraine to exploit in Kharkov
1