Comments by "0x777" (@0x777) on "Russia changes leadership of faltering invasion of Ukraine" video.

  1. Careful what you wish for, I doubt that it would really improve the situation when Prigozhin really ousts Putin.
    3
  2. Keep telling yourself that, with a hint of luck you'll at least convince yourself.
    2
  3. For a moment I was like "Huh? Already, I thought Prigozhin was supposed to overthrow Putin way later?" But that's something different. Never mind, carry on.
    2
  4.  @davidbrown5411  Well, not really. Unlike Hitler, Zelenskiy is playing for time. Any hour, any day he manages to stall is working in his favor, unlike Hitler (or Putin for that matter) who can only succeed if they manage to score a quick victory because a prolonged battle lets their enemy build up their war machine. Russia entered this conflict with its military power at its peak, while the West didn't have a military production to speak of. That only works out for Russia if it can end this conflict before the West gets to ramp up its production and stuff more weapons into Ukraine than they can fire. Russia, on the other hand, cannot keep production up with use, as we have seen in the slowing down of their attacks. Time is not on Russia's side.
    2
  5. Is his nappy full again already? Damn, that incontinent old geezer...
    2
  6.  @RaRa-eu9mw  Source: Trust me, bro. OK, granted, it's pretty much the same.
    1
  7. It's the Russian version of American Idol. Less singing, more shooting, and every week a couple of them get the shaft.
    1
  8. At this point, I'd be more surprised if it wasn't "Mr. Wagner" going to take over the job of Vovochka.
    1
  9. Already happened. Just like Hitler in WW2, Putin only has his generals as scapegoats and fall guys (as you see here) when things go south.
    1
  10.  @davidbrown5411  That "fraction if their strength" WAS their actual strength when you strip away the Potemkin army that the insanely corrupt commanders pretended to have. That IS the Russian army. Yes, sad to say it, but that's it. Why, do you think Russia would not have thrown more into this battle if they could? Why? Time is not working for Russia. Putin is throwing hissy fits because his commanders can't get results, you think that he WANTS a pitched battle? Every single day bleeds Russia dry, what Russia needs is a fast and decisive victory. Why the hell would Russia hold back its military might if it existed?
    1
  11.  @davidbrown5411  Unfortunately I know Soviet military tactics way, way better than I'd care anymore. Fortunately that part of my life is behind me. Russian military tactics can work if, and only if, executed correctly. Most of all it depends on things going according to plan. If they went, this would have worked great. The thing is, they didn't. Russia, unlike the West, operates on the plan that a military battalion can operate independent from logistics and supplies for a week. They have that amount with them. US doctrine dictates that logistics have to touch down with the soldier. Frankly, by now often the logistics is in place before the first soldier hits the beachhead. Kinda insane. But that's one of the core differences. This is why Russia stalled after the first week because the war was supposed to be over by then. They had no logistics prepared. Because it was not supposed to last more than a week. Establishing Russian logistics is also not easy. The Russian logistics network relies heavily on trains. That's why you had this ridiculous hodgepodge of civilian transport vehicles doing logistics at the start of the war (and spawned the joke of "an operation so special it's supplied by short busses"). And so on. Believe me, I do understand Russian tactics. And I know when I see Russia struggling with supply problems. Because one of their doctrines, and they try to stick with it despite the shortages, is to rely heavily on artillery. That's a solid strategy, if you start out on the defense. It only has two very relevant drawbacks, it is very slow and it relies on being able to transport those heavy pieces into battle, both problems Russia is suffering from. You'll notice that as soon as battles start to become static, Russia is doing fairly well after it had time to get its artillery into place. One should (and frankly, I did) expect that to be way more effective, though. The reason it is not is that Russia is lacking the capacity to produce enough shells to actually pull through with this strategy. Kherson should essentially be indefensible if Russia has the artillery shells it needs. It doesn't. And that's exactly the problem Russia is facing right now.
    1