Youtube comments of WhatAboutTheBee (@WhatAboutTheBee).

  1. 412
  2. 289
  3. 193
  4. 162
  5. 161
  6. 149
  7. 139
  8. 137
  9. 135
  10. 133
  11. 133
  12. 133
  13. 127
  14. 126
  15. 102
  16. 101
  17. 99
  18. 97
  19. 89
  20. 89
  21. 84
  22. 74
  23. 72
  24. 70
  25. 68
  26. 67
  27. 58
  28. 54
  29. 53
  30. 52
  31. 49
  32. 47
  33. 44
  34. 43
  35. 42
  36. 42
  37. 39
  38. 38
  39. 38
  40. 38
  41. 38
  42. 37
  43. 36
  44. 36
  45. 34
  46. 34
  47. 33
  48. 31
  49. 30
  50. 30
  51. 29
  52. 29
  53. 26
  54. 26
  55. 25
  56. 25
  57. 25
  58. 24
  59. 24
  60. 22
  61. 22
  62. 22
  63. 21
  64. 21
  65. 21
  66. 21
  67. 21
  68. 20
  69. 19
  70. 19
  71. 19
  72. 19
  73. 19
  74. 19
  75. 19
  76. 18
  77. 18
  78. 18
  79. 18
  80. 17
  81. 17
  82. 17
  83. 17
  84. 16
  85. 16
  86. 16
  87. 16
  88. 15
  89. 15
  90. 15
  91. 15
  92. 15
  93. 15
  94. 14
  95. 14
  96. 14
  97. 14
  98. 14
  99. 14
  100. 14
  101. 14
  102. 14
  103. 14
  104. 13
  105. 13
  106. 13
  107. 13
  108. 13
  109. 13
  110. 13
  111. 13
  112. 13
  113. 13
  114. 13
  115. 12
  116. 12
  117. 12
  118. 12
  119. 12
  120. 12
  121. 12
  122. 12
  123. 12
  124. 11
  125. 11
  126. 11
  127. 11
  128. 11
  129. 11
  130. 11
  131. 11
  132. 11
  133. 11
  134. 11
  135. 10
  136. 10
  137. 10
  138. 10
  139. 10
  140. 10
  141. 10
  142. 10
  143. 10
  144. 10
  145. 10
  146. 10
  147. 10
  148. 10
  149. 10
  150. 10
  151. 9
  152. 9
  153. 9
  154. 9
  155. 9
  156. 9
  157. 9
  158. 9
  159. 9
  160. 9
  161. 9
  162. 9
  163. 9
  164. 9
  165. 9
  166. 9
  167. 9
  168. 9
  169. 9
  170. 8
  171. 8
  172. 8
  173. 8
  174. 8
  175. 8
  176. 8
  177. 8
  178. 8
  179. 8
  180. 8
  181. 8
  182. 8
  183. 8
  184. 8
  185. 8
  186. 8
  187. 8
  188. 8
  189. 8
  190. 8
  191. 8
  192. 7
  193. 7
  194. 7
  195. 7
  196. 7
  197. 7
  198. 7
  199. 7
  200. 7
  201. 7
  202. 7
  203. 7
  204. 7
  205. 7
  206. 7
  207. 7
  208. 7
  209. 7
  210. 7
  211. 7
  212. 7
  213. 7
  214. 7
  215. 7
  216. 7
  217. 7
  218. 7
  219. 6
  220. 6
  221. 6
  222. 6
  223. 6
  224. 6
  225. 6
  226. 6
  227. 6
  228. 6
  229. 6
  230. 6
  231. 6
  232. 6
  233. 6
  234. 6
  235. 6
  236. 6
  237. 6
  238. 6
  239. 6
  240. 6
  241. 6
  242. 6
  243. 6
  244. 6
  245. 6
  246. 6
  247. 6
  248. 6
  249. 6
  250. 6
  251. 6
  252. 6
  253. 6
  254. 6
  255. 6
  256. 5
  257. 5
  258. 5
  259. 5
  260. 5
  261. 5
  262. 5
  263. 5
  264. 5
  265. 5
  266. 5
  267. 5
  268. 5
  269. 5
  270. 5
  271. 5
  272. 5
  273. 5
  274. 5
  275. 5
  276. 5
  277. 5
  278. 5
  279. 5
  280. 5
  281. 5
  282. 5
  283. 5
  284. 5
  285. 5
  286. 5
  287. 5
  288. 5
  289. 5
  290. 5
  291. 5
  292. Long time viewer of this channel. RFU is Ukrainian, and therefore supports his country. That does not prevent him from honest reporting, honest assessments. RFU also provides excellent tactical details unavailable elsewhere. You are, of course, entitled to believe what you want, but I am confident the information is accurate and has good correlation with reality. And while I have your attention: "Ukraine Matters". Excellent. Reviews the front lines. Good perspective. Very pro Ukraine without being ridiculous. Highly recommended. "Reporting from Ukraine" spectacular from a tactics point of view. Puts you right into the trenches. "military lab". He calls the shots as they are. Nobody is neutral. Military Lab is not, but that does not prevent him from assessing the situation without rose colored glasses. "Anna from Ukraine" is an authentic Ukrainian voice. She does not provide battlefield analysis. She does report on current events and top level topics, from a Ukrainian woman standpoint. Highly recommended. "Anders Puck Nielson" provides a great perspective from a strategic level. He is a professor and clearly gets the issues. Explains them well, too! "Mariia Veshchunova" well written and well delivered. A new channel, unabashedly pro Ukraine. Delivered from Ukraine, by a Ukrainian voice "Arthur Rehi" provides the viewpoint of an Estonian. Excellent in my view. Former infantry man. Very active in getting equipment into Ukraine. "Military & History". Torsten carefully examines data from all sides, and demands that claims be supported, not just claimed. Thus, his assessments are conservative and accurate, but not as timely as other, more aggressive channels. "Jake Broe" reviews the news, from the standpoint of former US military background. Clear. Analytical. Not afraid to call russia out on their lies "Ryan McBeth" is a great resource. Worth a listen. Long time enlisted military. Debunks russian maskirovka "Denys Davidov" needs no introduction. A long term, solid voice for Ukraine. Absolutely recommended. "Operator Starsky" Ukrainian military officer. Good sense of humor. Offers commentary on high level topics.
    5
  293. 5
  294. 5
  295. 5
  296. 4
  297. 4
  298. 4
  299. 4
  300. 4
  301. 4
  302. 4
  303. 4
  304. 4
  305. 4
  306. 4
  307. 4
  308. 4
  309. 4
  310. 4
  311. 4
  312. 4
  313. 4
  314. 4
  315. 4
  316. 4
  317. 4
  318. 4
  319. 4
  320. 4
  321. 4
  322. 4
  323. 4
  324. 4
  325. 4
  326. 4
  327. 4
  328. 4
  329. 4
  330. 4
  331. 4
  332. 4
  333. 4
  334. 4
  335. 4
  336. 4
  337. 4
  338. 4
  339. 4
  340. 3
  341. 3
  342. 3
  343. 3
  344. 3
  345. 3
  346. 3
  347. 3
  348. 3
  349. 3
  350. 3
  351. 3
  352. 3
  353. 3
  354. 3
  355. 3
  356. 3
  357. 3
  358. 3
  359. 3
  360. 3
  361. 3
  362. 3
  363. 3
  364. 3
  365. 3
  366. 3
  367. 3
  368. 3
  369. 3
  370. 3
  371. 3
  372. 3
  373. 3
  374. 3
  375. 3
  376. 3
  377. 3
  378. 3
  379. 3
  380. 3
  381. 3
  382. 3
  383. 3
  384. 3
  385. 3
  386. 3
  387. 3
  388. 3
  389. 3
  390. 3
  391. 3
  392. 3
  393. 3
  394. 3
  395. 3
  396. 3
  397. 3
  398. 3
  399. 3
  400. 3
  401. 3
  402. 3
  403. 3
  404. 3
  405. 3
  406. 3
  407. 3
  408. 3
  409. 3
  410. 3
  411. 3
  412. 3
  413. 3
  414. 3
  415. 3
  416. 3
  417. 3
  418. 3
  419. 3
  420. 3
  421. 3
  422. 3
  423. 3
  424. 3
  425. 3
  426. 3
  427. 3
  428. 3
  429. 3
  430. 3
  431. 3
  432. 3
  433. 3
  434. 3
  435. 3
  436. 3
  437. 3
  438. 3
  439. 3
  440. 3
  441. 3
  442. 3
  443. 3
  444. 3
  445. 3
  446. 3
  447. 3
  448. 2
  449. 2
  450. 2
  451. 2
  452. 2
  453. 2
  454. 2
  455. 2
  456. 2
  457. 2
  458. 2
  459. 2
  460. 2
  461. 2
  462. 2
  463. 2
  464. 2
  465. 2
  466. 2
  467. 2
  468. 2
  469. 2
  470. 2
  471. 2
  472. 2
  473. 2
  474. 2
  475. 2
  476. 2
  477. 2
  478. 2
  479.  @Roger_Gadd  Ukraine will force russia out just like the Mujahideen forced them out of Afghanistan. You see, Ukraine doesn't have to win in the traditional sense, they just have to keep fighting until russia decides enough is enough. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia needs to occupy with 880,000 troopers. russia doesn't have those numbers. Not even close. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the reality is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. For 20 years. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will.
    2
  480. 2
  481.  @LD-pt5ur  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia needs to occupy with 880,000 troopers. russia doesn't have those numbers. Not even close. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    2
  482. 2
  483. 2
  484. 2
  485. 2
  486. 2
  487. 2
  488. 2
  489. 2
  490. 2
  491.  @thephoenix756  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia would need to occupy with 880,000 troopers IF THE POPULATION WAS DOCILE. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. Further, it must be generational, so 3.3M troops for a generation or 20 years. russia simply doesn't have the stamina russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    2
  492. 2
  493. 2
  494. 2
  495. 2
  496. 2
  497. 2
  498. 2
  499. 2
  500. 2
  501. 2
  502. 2
  503. 2
  504. 2
  505. 2
  506. 2
  507. 2
  508. 2
  509. 2
  510. 2
  511. 2
  512. 2
  513. 2
  514. 2
  515. 2
  516. 2
  517. 2
  518. 2
  519. 2
  520. 2
  521. 2
  522. 2
  523. 2
  524. 2
  525. 2
  526. 2
  527. 2
  528. 2
  529. 2
  530. 2
  531. 2
  532. 2
  533. 2
  534. 2
  535. 2
  536. 2
  537. 2
  538. 2
  539. 2
  540. 2
  541. 2
  542. 2
  543. 2
  544. 2
  545. 2
  546. 2
  547. 2
  548. 2
  549. 2
  550. 2
  551. 2
  552. 2
  553. 2
  554. 2
  555. 2
  556. 2
  557. 2
  558. 2
  559. 2
  560. 2
  561. 2
  562. 2
  563. 2
  564. 2
  565. 2
  566. 2
  567. 2
  568. 2
  569. 2
  570. 2
  571. 2
  572. 2
  573. 2
  574. 2
  575. 2
  576. 2
  577. 2
  578. 2
  579. 2
  580. 2
  581. 2
  582. 2
  583. 2
  584. 2
  585. 2
  586. 2
  587. 2
  588. 2
  589. 2
  590. 2
  591. 2
  592. 2
  593. 2
  594. 2
  595. 2
  596. 2
  597. 2
  598. 2
  599. 2
  600. 2
  601. 2
  602. 2
  603. 2
  604. 2
  605. 2
  606. 2
  607. 2
  608. 2
  609. 2
  610. 2
  611. 2
  612. 2
  613. 2
  614. 2
  615. 2
  616. 2
  617. 2
  618. 2
  619. 2
  620. 2
  621. 2
  622. 2
  623. 2
  624. 2
  625. 2
  626. 2
  627. 2
  628. 2
  629. 1
  630. 1
  631. 1
  632. 1
  633. 1
  634. 1
  635. 1
  636. 1
  637. 1
  638. 1
  639. 1
  640. 1
  641. 1
  642. 1
  643. 1
  644. 1
  645. 1
  646. 1
  647. 1
  648. 1
  649. 1
  650. 1
  651. 1
  652. 1
  653. 1
  654. 1
  655. 1
  656. 1
  657. 1
  658. 1
  659. 1
  660. 1
  661. 1
  662. 1
  663. 1
  664. 1
  665. 1
  666. 1
  667. 1
  668. 1
  669. 1
  670. 1
  671. 1
  672. 1
  673. 1
  674. 1
  675. 1
  676. 1
  677. 1
  678. 1
  679. 1
  680. 1
  681.  @briant5685  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia needs to occupy with 880,000 troopers. russia doesn't have those numbers. Not even close. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    1
  682. 1
  683. 1
  684. 1
  685. 1
  686. 1
  687. 1
  688. 1
  689. 1
  690. 1
  691. 1
  692. 1
  693. 1
  694. 1
  695. 1
  696. 1
  697. 1
  698. 1
  699. 1
  700. 1
  701. 1
  702. 1
  703. 1
  704. 1
  705. 1
  706.  @bigboy9693  You know how to win wars Dmitry? Logistics and raw economic power, industrial output wins wars, not sending cruise missiles into apartment buildings. The West has sent a bunch of HIMARS launchers and innumerable GMLRS munitions to fire from them. How many HIMARS launchers will Ukraine require to win? 32, but that's not how many Ukraine will use. They will use more. Lots more. Russia hasn't been able to succesfully target one launcher, but the West will continue to supply new launchers. Good luck with that Dmitry. It is not the quantity of launchers that is important, it is the quantity of missiles. The next NDAA 2023 includes 106,000 GMLRS missiles in the authorization. Open wide! Learn how to swallow russia. GLSDB are now authorized, as well as Western tanks. Are you feeling lucky russia? How long until jets? ATACMS? Kerch Strait bridge go boom. How long will Victory take? Western resolve, Ukrainian resolve is for the long haul. Who cares how long it takes. 1 year, 5 years, 20 years? It does not matter. russia will be driven out of Ukraine. 115,00 russian dead so far. That is in 11 months, roughly 11.5K/month. At this rate, russia will incur 690,000 cargo 200 in 5 years. Makes me smile! 🙂 Remember that bit about economic power winning wars? russian GDP is ~1.8T USD. The countries supplying Ukraine have a combined GDP of 40T USD. Long term war is completely about logistics. Not firing the gun once, but firing over and over, but most importantly keeping it supplied. The economic advantage of the West to russia is 40 to 1.8 or a 22:1 advantage. If all things remain the same, russia has a 22:1 shortfall. But things aren't going to remain the same. Dear leader putin cut off European gas (meaning no income from Europe). Europe put a price cap on russian oil (meaning no profit from Europe). So go ahead russia, try to sell your shite elsewhere. Watch the Chinese and Indians negotiate russia on price into a hole. Which they have. The cap is $60, current trading in Ural Crude is ~$50/barrel. So the russian petro-economy will slowly implode, making the 22:1 economic ratio even steeper. The sanctions continue to constrict the russian economy. Even the russian central bank is declaring that the russian economy is shrinking. The state bank lies of course, the russian economy is collapsing.
    1
  707.  @bigboy9693  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia would need to occupy with 880,000 troopers IF THE POPULATION WAS DOCILE. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. Further, it must be generational, so 3.3M troops for a generation or 20 years. russia simply doesn't have the stamina russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    1
  708. 1
  709. 1
  710. 1
  711. 1
  712.  @graemepeters5717  You know how to win wars Dmitry? Logistics and raw economic power, industrial output wins wars, not sending cruise missiles into apartment buildings. The West has sent a bunch of HIMARS launchers and innumerable GMLRS munitions to fire from them. How many HIMARS launchers will Ukraine require to win? 32, but that's not how many Ukraine will use. They will use more. Lots more. Russia hasn't been able to succesfully target one launcher, but the West will continue to supply new launchers. Good luck with that Dmitry. It is not the quantity of launchers that is important, it is the quantity of missiles. The next NDAA 2023 includes 106,000 GMLRS missiles in the authorization. Open wide! Learn how to swallow russia. GLSDB are now authorized, as well as Western tanks. Are you feeling lucky russia? How long until jets? ATACMS? Kerch Strait bridge go boom. How long will Victory take? Western resolve, Ukrainian resolve is for the long haul. Who cares how long it takes. 1 year, 5 years, 20 years? It does not matter. russia will be driven out of Ukraine. 115,00 russian dead so far. That is in 11 months, roughly 11.5K/month. At this rate, russia will incur 690,000 cargo 200 in 5 years. Makes me smile! 🙂 Remember that bit about economic power winning wars? russian GDP is ~1.8T USD. The countries supplying Ukraine have a combined GDP of 40T USD. Long term war is completely about logistics. Not firing the gun once, but firing over and over, but most importantly keeping it supplied. The economic advantage of the West to russia is 40 to 1.8 or a 22:1 advantage. If all things remain the same, russia has a 22:1 shortfall. But things aren't going to remain the same. Dear leader putin cut off European gas (meaning no income from Europe). Europe put a price cap on russian oil (meaning no profit from Europe). So go ahead russia, try to sell your shite elsewhere. Watch the Chinese and Indians negotiate russia on price into a hole. Which they have. The cap is $60, current trading in Ural Crude is ~$50/barrel. So the russian petro-economy will slowly implode, making the 22:1 economic ratio even steeper. The sanctions continue to constrict the russian economy. Even the russian central bank is declaring that the russian economy is shrinking. The state bank lies of course, the russian economy is collapsing.
    1
  713. 1
  714.  @graemepeters5717  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia would need to occupy with 880,000 troopers IF THE POPULATION WAS DOCILE. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. Further, it must be generational, so 3.3M troops for a generation or 20 years. russia simply doesn't have the stamina russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    1
  715. 1
  716. 1
  717. 1
  718. 1
  719. 1
  720. 1
  721. 1
  722. 1
  723. 1
  724. 1
  725. 1
  726. 1
  727. 1
  728. 1
  729. 1
  730. 1
  731. 1
  732. 1
  733. 1
  734. 1
  735. 1
  736. 1
  737. 1
  738. 1
  739. 1
  740. 1
  741. 1
  742. 1
  743. 1
  744. 1
  745. 1
  746. 1
  747. 1
  748. 1
  749. 1
  750. 1
  751. 1
  752.  @kartikeyatiwari2502  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia would need to occupy with 880,000 troopers IF THE POPULATION WAS DOCILE. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. Further, it must be generational, so 3.3M troops for a generation or 20 years. russia simply doesn't have the stamina russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    1
  753. 1
  754. 1
  755. 1
  756. 1
  757. 1
  758. 1
  759. 1
  760. 1
  761. 1
  762.  @LD-pt5ur  Another tiny nuclear threat from a tiny russian troll. There are 36 nuclear power plants in the sh♤thole known as russia. The precise coordinates of each of russia's NPP are extremely well known. For example, the Калининская АЭС is located at 57.903247N, 35.056095E. This is, of course, a mere 200 km from the capital of the sh♤thole known as russia, to wit: moscow. It would be a pity if a warhead went off course and burst on the ground at the Калининская АЭС. A nuclear burst creates a tremendous updraft of super heated air, sucking everything up and into the atmosphere. But since that burst would be on the ground at a NPP, the reactor will become atomized and join the updraft. Fallout will occur, containing the radioactive particles from the reactor. Salting the russian capital with radionuclides to last 500,000 years. Pity that. The best part? russia cannot stop a HIMARS strike, how will russia ever stop a Trident II-D5 strike? From a russian perspective, a Trident II-D5 strike is UNSTOPPABLE. russia just gets to swallow it. Would you like to know where the other 35 NPP are, Dmitry? Each NPP will be accidentally struck dead center, in the most amazing string of bad luck and coincidence. 3 warheads allocated for each. Accidentally, of course. Not only will russia be destroyed, but there never will be any population in russia, ever again. Radiation poisoning from the fallout will kill any and all survivors of the blasts. 36 × 3 = 108 war heads If the sh♤thole wants to commit suicide, they are welcome to try. The US maintains 14 Ohio class submarines. Each submarine has 24 launch tubes. Each tube contains a Trident II-D5 missile. Each missile contains 14 independently targetable warheads. Each warhead has a selectable yield of up to 475,000 tons. For reference, Hiroshima was 13,000 tons. So 14 submarines × 24 missiles × 14 warheads = 4704 warheads. 4704 warheads, each one more than 36 times more powerful than Hiroshima. So go ahead Dmitry, make your petty threats again. еб♤ть россия.
    1
  763. 1
  764. 1
  765. 1
  766.  @jamesgornall5731  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia would need to occupy with 880,000 troopers IF THE POPULATION WAS DOCILE. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. Further, it must be generational, so 3.3M troops for a generation or 20 years. russia simply doesn't have the stamina russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    1
  767. 1
  768. 1
  769. 1
  770. 1
  771. 1
  772. 1
  773. 1
  774. 1
  775. 1
  776. 1
  777. 1
  778. 1
  779. 1
  780. 1
  781. 1
  782. 1
  783. 1
  784. 1
  785. 1
  786. 1
  787. 1
  788. 1
  789. 1
  790. 1
  791. 1
  792. 1
  793. 1
  794. 1
  795. 1
  796. 1
  797. 1
  798. 1
  799. 1
  800. 1
  801. 1
  802. 1
  803. 1
  804. 1
  805. 1
  806. 1
  807.  @hugostiglitz8263  You know how to win wars Dmitry? Logistics and raw economic power, industrial output wins wars, not sending cruise missiles into apartment buildings. The West has sent a bunch of HIMARS launchers and innumerable GMLRS munitions to fire from them. How many HIMARS launchers will Ukraine require to win? 32, but that's not how many Ukraine will use. They will use more. Lots more. Russia hasn't been able to succesfully target one launcher, but the West will continue to supply new launchers. Good luck with that Dmitry. It is not the quantity of launchers that is important, it is the quantity of missiles. The next NDAA 2023 includes 106,000 GMLRS missiles in the authorization. Open wide! Learn how to swallow russia. GLSDB are now authorized, as well as Western tanks. Are you feeling lucky russia? How long until jets? ATACMS? Kerch Strait bridge go boom. How long will Victory take? Western resolve, Ukrainian resolve is for the long haul. Who cares how long it takes. 1 year, 5 years, 20 years? It does not matter. russia will be driven out of Ukraine. 115,00 russian dead so far. That is in 11 months, roughly 11.5K/month. At this rate, russia will incur 690,000 cargo 200 in 5 years. Makes me smile! 🙂 Remember that bit about economic power winning wars? russian GDP is ~1.8T USD. The countries supplying Ukraine have a combined GDP of 40T USD. Long term war is completely about logistics. Not firing the gun once, but firing over and over, but most importantly keeping it supplied. The economic advantage of the West to russia is 40 to 1.8 or a 22:1 advantage. If all things remain the same, russia has a 22:1 shortfall. But things aren't going to remain the same. Dear leader putin cut off European gas (meaning no income from Europe). Europe put a price cap on russian oil (meaning no profit from Europe). So go ahead russia, try to sell your shite elsewhere. Watch the Chinese and Indians negotiate russia on price into a hole. Which they have. The cap is $60, current trading in Ural Crude is ~$50/barrel. So the russian petro-economy will slowly implode, making the 22:1 economic ratio even steeper. The sanctions continue to constrict the russian economy. Even the russian central bank is declaring that the russian economy is shrinking. The state bank lies of course, the russian economy is collapsing.
    1
  808. 1
  809. 1
  810. 1
  811. 1
  812. 1
  813. 1
  814. 1
  815. 1
  816. 1
  817. 1
  818. 1
  819. 1
  820. 1
  821. 1
  822. 1
  823. 1
  824. 1
  825. 1
  826. 1
  827. 1
  828. 1
  829. 1
  830. 1
  831. 1
  832. 1
  833. 1
  834. 1
  835. 1
  836. 1
  837. 1
  838. 1
  839. 1
  840. 1
  841. 1
  842. 1
  843. 1
  844. 1
  845. 1
  846. 1
  847. 1
  848. 1
  849. 1
  850. 1
  851. 1
  852. 1
  853. 1
  854. 1
  855. 1
  856. 1
  857. 1
  858. 1
  859. 1
  860. 1
  861. 1
  862. 1
  863. 1
  864. 1
  865. 1
  866. 1
  867. 1
  868. 1
  869. 1
  870. 1
  871. 1
  872. 1
  873. 1
  874. 1
  875. 1
  876. 1
  877. 1
  878. 1
  879. 1
  880. 1
  881. 1
  882. 1
  883. 1
  884. 1
  885. 1
  886. 1
  887. 1
  888. 1
  889. 1
  890. 1
  891. 1
  892. 1
  893. 1
  894. 1
  895. 1
  896. ​ @robertmarks2379  Putin Boasts of Being Able to Take Kiev in 2 weeks. SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 6:21 PM EDT Reports emerged Tuesday that Russian President Vladimir Putin said he could take control of Ukraine’s capital city in as little as two weeks, a remark that escalated already pitched tensions between Russia and the West in the lead-up to NATO’s summit in Wales. ÷÷÷÷ It is important to note the date, mere months after russian occupation of Crimea. putin was on top of the world, Crimea and Donbas in exchange for some minor sanctions. He felt unstoppable and free to speak his mind. And so putin did speak his mind, without subterfuge or restraint, Ukraine will be taken two weeks. His innermost thoughts, revealed. ÷÷÷÷ Solovyov is on russian television, January 2022, blithely stating that Kyiv will be taken in three days Nothing on russian television is said without government direction. "In a hot war, we will defeat Ukraine in two days," claimed propagandist Margarita Simonyan on air in February, 2021 Anton Gerashchenko made a compilation video of russian propagandists, speaking on Rossiya 1, spouting nonsense about conquering Ukraine in a brief period of time. Gerashchenko released this on 20 April 2023, at 7:25AM. The tweet starts off with "russian propagandists complain about global misinformation". It isn't misinformation when the talking heads say it directly into the camera, with explicit government direction, on a russian government owned news channel. Isn't that right vatnik? Nothing is said or Rossiya 1 without government direction and approval.
    1
  897. 1
  898. 1
  899. 1
  900. 1
  901. 1
  902. 1
  903. 1
  904. 1
  905.  @XopBaTZ  в следующий раз предоставьте свою иррациональную оценку войны на русском языке. Таким образом, люди смогут увидеть вашу двусмысленную ложь об Украине такой, какая она есть. By the way, how presumptuous of you to assume anything about me Let us examine putin's war goals and evaluate how russia is doing 1) putin Goal: Push NATO back from the sh♤thole known as russia's borders. Evaluation: Finland joins NATO, border EXTENDED by 1,340 km. putin fails to achieve his goal. 2) putin Goal: replace President Zelenskyy with a puppet. Evaluation: russia humiliating retreat from Kyiv, no chance to replace President Zelenskyy. putin fails to achieve his goal. 3) putin Goal: demilitarize Ukraine, weaken its military. Evaluation: Ukraine’s armed forces increased from about 250,000 personnel before the war to 700,000 personnel and are now equipped with advanced Western weapons. The sh♡thole known as russia has no answer to HIMARS. Ukraine is far stronger today than anytime in the past. putin fails to achieve his goal. 4) putin Goal: De-nazify Ukraine. Evaluation: The only nazi in Ukraine are russians. If the sh♤thole wants to denazify Ukraine, they can achieve that by leaving. 5) putin Goal: Conquer Ukraine, annex all its lands. Evaluation: sh♤thole russian troops have taken Soledar, population 10,490. In fact, russians humiliating retreat near Kharkiv was followed by the laughable retreat near Kherson. 6) putin goal: preserve the russian language in Ukraine, stating that the russian language was being oppressed by Ukraine. Firstly, that's a demonstrably false accusation. Ukraine was not oppressing the language. Yet since the russian war, the invasion of Ukraine, the population of Ukraine is going out of their way to speak only Ukrainian. russian is not oppressed. Simply put, nobody wants to speak the language of invaders. Complete putin fail, achieves the opposite of his goal.
    1
  906. 1
  907. 1
  908. 1
  909. 1
  910. 1
  911. 1
  912. 1
  913. 1
  914. 1
  915. 1
  916. 1
  917. 1
  918. 1
  919. 1
  920. 1
  921. 1
  922. 1
  923. 1
  924. 1
  925. 1
  926. 1
  927. 1
  928. 1
  929. 1
  930. 1
  931. 1
  932. 1
  933. 1
  934. 1
  935. 1
  936. 1
  937. 1
  938. 1
  939. 1
  940. 1
  941. 1
  942. 1
  943. 1
  944. 1
  945. 1
  946. 1
  947. 1
  948. 1
  949. 1
  950. 1
  951. 1
  952. 1
  953. 1
  954. 1
  955. 1
  956. 1
  957. 1
  958. 1
  959. 1
  960. 1
  961. 1
  962. 1
  963. 1
  964. 1
  965. 1
  966. 1
  967. 1
  968. 1
  969. 1
  970. 1
  971. 1
  972. 1
  973. 1
  974.  @frankbandera6591  what russia, russian trolls and simpletons like you seem to forget is that missiles can fly both ways. Another tiny nuclear threat from a tiny russian troll. That's you little frankie There are 36 nuclear power plants in the sh♤thole known as russia. The precise coordinates of each of russia's NPP are extremely well known. For example, the Калининская АЭС is located at 57.903247N, 35.056095E. This is, of course, a mere 200 km from the capital of the sh♤thole known as russia, to wit: moscow. It would be a pity if a warhead went off course and burst on the ground at the Калининская АЭС. A nuclear burst creates a tremendous updraft of super heated air, sucking everything up and into the atmosphere. But since that burst would be on the ground at a NPP, the reactor will become atomized and join the updraft. Fallout will occur, containing the radioactive particles from the reactor. Salting the russian capital with radionuclides to last 500,000 years. Pity that. The best part? russia cannot stop a HIMARS strike, how will russia ever stop a Trident II-D5 strike? From a russian perspective, a Trident II-D5 strike is UNSTOPPABLE. russia just gets to swallow it. Would you like to know where the other 35 NPP are? Each NPP will be accidentally struck dead center, in the most amazing string of bad luck and coincidence. 3 warheads allocated for each. Accidentally, of course. Not only will russia be destroyed, but there never will be any population in russia, ever again. Radiation poisoning from the fallout will kill any and all survivors of the blasts. 36 × 3 = 108 war heads the sh♤thole wants to commit suicide, they are welcome to try. The US maintains 14 Ohio class submarines. Each submarine has 24 launch tubes. Each tube contains a Trident II-D5 missile. Each missile contains 14 independently targetable warheads. Each warhead has a selectable yield of up to 475,000 tons. For reference, Hiroshima was 13,000 tons. So 14 submarines × 24 missiles × 14 warheads = 4704 warheads. 4704 warheads, each one more than 36 times more powerful than Hiroshima. With 108 warheads allocated for the sh♤thole's 36 NPP, I wonder where we will send the remaining 4596 warheads. 🤔 So go ahead russian troll, make your petty threats again. еб♤ть россия.
    1
  975. 1
  976. 1
  977. 1
  978. 1
  979.  @Silver_Prussian  Let us examine putin's war goals and evaluate how russia is doing 1) putin Goal: Push NATO back from the sh♤thole known as russia's borders. Evaluation: Finland joins NATO, border EXTENDED by 1,340 km. putin fails to achieve his goal. 2) putin Goal: replace President Zelenskyy with a puppet. Evaluation: russia humiliating retreat from Kyiv, no chance to replace President Zelenskyy. putin fails to achieve his goal. 3) putin Goal: demilitarize Ukraine, weaken its military. Evaluation: Ukraine’s armed forces increased from about 250,000 personnel before the war to 700,000 personnel and are now equipped with advanced Western weapons. The sh♡thole known as russia has no answer to HIMARS. Tanks are on their way. GLSDB authorized. How much longer until jets and ATACMS? Ukraine is far stronger today than anytime in the past. putin fails to achieve his goal. 4) putin Goal: De-nazify Ukraine. Evaluation: The only nazi in Ukraine are russians. If the sh♤thole wants to denazify Ukraine, they can achieve that by leaving. 5) putin Goal: Conquer Ukraine, annex all its lands. Evaluation: In fact, russians humiliating retreat near Kharkiv was followed by the laughable retreat near Kherson. russia finally did achieve a great victory and captured Soledar, prewar population 10,490. russia only incurred 20,000 casualties to win this great victory, but those were Wagner. russian military cannot even achieve that. 6) putin goal: preserve the russian language in Ukraine, stating that the russian language was being oppressed by Ukraine. Firstly, that's a demonstrably false accusation. Ukraine was not oppressing the language. Yet since the russian war, the invasion of Ukraine, the population of Ukraine is going out of their way to speak only Ukrainian. russian is not oppressed. Simply put, nobody wants to speak the language of invaders. Complete putin fail, achieves the opposite of his goal.
    1
  980. 1
  981. 1
  982. 1
  983. 1
  984. 1
  985. 1
  986. 1
  987. 1
  988. 1
  989. 1
  990. 1
  991. 1
  992. 1
  993. 1
  994. 1
  995. 1
  996. 1
  997. 1
  998. 1
  999. 1
  1000. 1
  1001. 1
  1002. 1
  1003. 1
  1004. 1
  1005. 1
  1006. 1
  1007. 1
  1008. 1
  1009. 1
  1010. 1
  1011. 1
  1012. 1
  1013. 1
  1014. 1
  1015. 1
  1016. 1
  1017. 1
  1018. 1
  1019. 1
  1020. 1
  1021. 1
  1022. 1
  1023. 1
  1024. 1
  1025. 1
  1026. 1
  1027. 1
  1028. 1
  1029. 1
  1030. 1
  1031. 1
  1032. 1
  1033. 1
  1034. 1
  1035. 1
  1036. 1
  1037. 1
  1038. 1
  1039. 1
  1040. 1
  1041. 1
  1042. 1
  1043. 1
  1044. 1
  1045. 1
  1046. 1
  1047. 1
  1048. 1
  1049. 1
  1050. 1
  1051. 1
  1052. 1
  1053. 1
  1054. 1
  1055. 1
  1056. 1
  1057. 1
  1058. 1
  1059. 1
  1060. 1
  1061. 1
  1062. 1
  1063. 1
  1064. 1
  1065. 1
  1066. 1
  1067. 1
  1068. 1
  1069. 1
  1070. 1
  1071. 1
  1072. 1
  1073. 1
  1074. 1
  1075. 1
  1076. 1
  1077. 1
  1078. 1
  1079. 1
  1080. 1
  1081. 1
  1082. 1
  1083. 1
  1084. 1
  1085. 1
  1086. 1
  1087. 1
  1088. 1
  1089. 1
  1090. 1
  1091. 1
  1092. 1
  1093. 1
  1094. 1
  1095. 1
  1096. 1
  1097. 1
  1098. 1
  1099. 1
  1100. 1
  1101. 1
  1102. 1
  1103. 1
  1104. 1
  1105. 1
  1106. 1
  1107. 1
  1108. 1
  1109. 1
  1110.  @AndreyUfa7  Here is some military science for a russian troll. In order for russia to win the war, russia needs roughly a 3:1 advantage in troop numbers. The Ukrainian Army is estimated to be ~700K, therefore, russia needs to attack with 2.1 million troops. russia has nowhere near those number of troopers, so russia can never conquer Ukraine. Should russia miraculously conquer Ukraine, the occupation begins. Occupation is the hard part, conquering is the easy part. Conquering is the part russia seems incapable of achieving but that's the easy part. Occupation. For a docile population, such as russian sheep, military science indicates 20 troops per 1000 civilian population. With the population of Ukraine at 44 million, russia would need to occupy with 880,000 troopers IF THE POPULATION WAS DOCILE. For a restive population, with partisan activity, such as the people of Ukraine, the military science of occupation dictates 75 troopers per 1000 of population in occupation. For a Ukrainian population of 44 million, the REALITY is that russia would need to field 3,300,000 troops to occupy Ukraine. russia has nowhere close to those numbers. Further, it must be generational, so 3.3M troops for a generation or 20 years. russia simply doesn't have the stamina russia cannot conquer Ukraine due to insufficient numbers and russia cannot occupy Ukraine due to insufficient numbers, consequently the war will grind on and on for russia. With the concomitant casualties inherent for the attacker. russia has lost. The fighting may not be over, but russia has lost. Never had the numbers. Never will. Got that Moskal?
    1
  1111. 1
  1112. 1
  1113. 1
  1114. 1
  1115. 1
  1116. 1
  1117. 1
  1118. 1
  1119. 1
  1120. 1
  1121. 1
  1122. 1
  1123. 1
  1124. 1
  1125. 1
  1126. 1
  1127. 1
  1128. 1
  1129. 1
  1130. 1
  1131. 1
  1132. 1
  1133. 1
  1134. 1
  1135. 1
  1136. 1
  1137. 1
  1138. 1
  1139. 1
  1140. 1
  1141. 1
  1142. 1
  1143. 1
  1144. 1
  1145. 1
  1146. 1
  1147. 1
  1148. 1
  1149. 1
  1150. 1
  1151. 1
  1152. 1
  1153. 1
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. 1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. 1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228. 1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. 1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. 1
  1247. 1
  1248. 1
  1249. 1
  1250. 1
  1251. 1
  1252. 1
  1253. 1
  1254. 1
  1255. 1
  1256. 1
  1257. 1
  1258. 1
  1259.  @krotemitschield  Let us examine putin's war goals and evaluate how russia is doing 1) putin Goal: Push NATO back from the sh♤thole known as russia's borders. Evaluation: Finland joins NATO, border EXTENDED by 1,340 km. putin fails to achieve his goal. 2) putin Goal: replace President Zelenskyy with a puppet. Evaluation: russia humiliating retreat from Kyiv, no chance to replace President Zelenskyy. putin fails to achieve his goal. 3) putin Goal: demilitarize Ukraine, weaken its military. Evaluation: Ukraine’s armed forces increased from about 250,000 personnel before the war to 700,000 personnel and are now equipped with advanced Western weapons. The sh♡thole known as russia has no answer to HIMARS. Tanks are on their way. GLSDB authorized. How much longer until jets and ATACMS? Ukraine is far stronger today than anytime in the past. putin fails to achieve his goal. 4) putin Goal: De-nazify Ukraine. Evaluation: The only nazi in Ukraine are russians. If the sh♤thole wants to denazify Ukraine, they can achieve that by leaving. 5) putin Goal: Conquer Ukraine, annex all its lands. Evaluation: In fact, russians humiliating retreat near Kharkiv was followed by the laughable retreat near Kherson. russia finally did achieve a great victory and captured Soledar, prewar population 10,490. russia only incurred 20,000 casualties to win this great victory, but those were Wagner. russian military cannot even achieve that. 6) putin goal: preserve the russian language in Ukraine, stating that the russian language was being oppressed by Ukraine. Firstly, that's a demonstrably false accusation. Ukraine was not oppressing the language. Yet since the russian war, the invasion of Ukraine, the population of Ukraine is going out of their way to speak only Ukrainian. russian is not oppressed. Simply put, nobody wants to speak the language of invaders. Complete putin fail, achieves the opposite of his goal.
    1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1
  1273. 1
  1274. 1
  1275.  @1pcfred Captain Kirkland’s Destroyers at Normandy, published by the NHF a quarter-century ago to mark the fiftieth anniversary of the invasion of Normandy. As then NHF president Adm. James Holloway wrote in the foreword: The landings in Normandy and the defeat of the German army were the Army’s tasks and clearly among its finest hours. Nevertheless, the military victory could not have happened without the naval forces to move the armies across the Channel, to put the troops ashore on the assault beaches, and then to provide the naval gunfire that, with close air support, enabled the assault forces to break out of the beachhead. Kirkland’s booklet focused on the nine destroyers of Destroyer Squadron 18 as well as three of their British counterparts that arguably played a pivotal in knocking out German fortifications. Drawing on primary sources such as deck logs, war diaries, and accounts from Sailors embarked on the destroyers and soldiers who benefitted from the gunfire support, Kirkland’s 84-page monograph has become an outstanding secondary source resource for more recent historians such as Craig Symonds who used it in his recent Operation Neptune documenting the naval portion of the Normandy invasion. What jumps out in Destroyers at Normandy is intimate relationship between the soldiers of the “Big Red One” and 29th Infantry Divisions having the brutal task of securing a beachhead ashore and the Navy’s “Tin Cans” that steamed right up to the surf line. Kirkland asserts this joint teamwork enabled the Americans to prevail. In his narrative, Kirkland describes three concurrent engagements where to the west, the assault of Pointe du Hoc by the 2nd and 5th Ranger Battalions received support from the destroyers Satterlee and Thompson. East of those cliffs, Carmick and McCook supported landings by the 115th and 116th Regimental Combat Teams and the 29th Infantry Division. Landings on the eastern beaches of Omaha by the 1st Infantry Division were backed up by the Emmons, Baldwin, Harding, Doyle, and Frankford. As Kirkland writes: The sequence of all three engagements followed a similar pattern: minesweeping, debarkation from transports, prelanding bombardment, and assault landings in three successive waves. After the assault waves went ashore, the destroyers fired at targets of opportunity to help the infantry break out of the landing beaches. Call fire, directed by fire control parties ashore, led to the final clearing of the landing beaches allowing armor and transport move inland. The progress of each phase of the action was quite different; none followed the prepared script. By moving so close in, the captains of the individual destroyers exposed their crews to great risks. Indeed, a mine claimed Corry before the first Soldiers were able to hit the beach. Overall after three days fighting would cost the Navy two additional destroyers, a destroyer escort, a troopship, and numerous amphibious craft. Army casualties at nearly 3,000 were horrific. As we commemorate the 75th anniversary of Operation Overload, Captain Kirkland’s book is well worth a read to reflect on service and sacrifice of both those who served in the Navy as well as the Army during this momentous event. Destroyers at Normandy: Naval Gunfire Support at Omaha Beach Evidence you ask?
    1
  1276. 1
  1277. 1
  1278. 1
  1279. 1
  1280. 1
  1281. 1
  1282. 1
  1283. 1
  1284. 1
  1285. 1
  1286. 1
  1287. 1
  1288. 1
  1289. 1
  1290. 1
  1291. 1
  1292. 1
  1293. 1
  1294. 1
  1295. 1
  1296. 1
  1297. 1
  1298. 1
  1299. 1
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. 1
  1316. 1
  1317. 1
  1318. 1
  1319. 1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. 1
  1323. 1
  1324. 1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1