Comments by "Gabor Rajnai" (@gaborrajnai6213) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1. Should we create some safe space for Ukrie fans?
    17
  2. France already gve Greenland nuclear guarantees, so yanks can forget about it, unless they want to burn.
    16
  3. The main selling point of the Armata was, that that they will use its chassis up to basically everything from self propelled howitzers to IFVs to toop transports, so its kindof a real technical challenge however if they get it right that would mean a significant cost reduction for the whole project. Russians kindof always go for these interoperable systems, and where they achieve it like with the Kalibr, they can massproduce it dirt cheap. It was never about "the tank" itself.
    13
  4.  @eslSlightz  Unless they deliver thousands of pilots with them they would be just sitting on the ground.
    13
  5.  @Mixan761  No, actually NATO spent twice the annual military budget of Russia on Ukraine.
    12
  6. T90 is actually a generation younger than the Abrams, so they never really needed the T14, they already have the newest tank in the shelf.
    12
  7. The one which is closer to home shores, otherwise the whole ASW power of the adversary will hunt for my sub. For a sonar buoy its almost the same if you have a Virginia or a Type 90, it will find your sub.
    9
  8. It turns out, that while NATO played Call of Duty, Russian military played Chess. And they are pretty close to a checkmate.
    9
  9. So basically you say that they should quit while they can.
    9
  10.  @PeteHagen-sm4tn  You still dont undertand the word independent. BTW even if Greenlanders chose to separate from Denmark they can be part of the European Union which gives them the same security guarantees they have now.
    8
  11.  @N911GT2  Are nazis in USA EU or UK marching around in the countryside kidnapping people, without government retributions?
    8
  12. Did ya hear that the same place, where Russians got their chips from washing machines, or occupied Bakhmut with shovels?
    8
  13. It was a good idea to give them your manufacturing base isnt it?
    7
  14. Well, Ukraine in NATO was always an American pet project. European leaders told that its a bad idea from the beginning... If they would be more independent this war wouldnt even happen.
    6
  15. Lol there is no state in the world, which is called Gaza, thatwhy it cant have any kind of government, which is voted for.
    6
  16. Well, strangely if you read Egyptian and Babylonian records, you wont find anything about Israel, but you will find the region what you talk about called as Palestine. I know its hard for our jewish friends, that when they wrote their paleolithic fairitales, their neighbors already made a yearly diplomatic annals about their exchanges with their neighbors.
    6
  17. 3 batteries. 100 km coverage for a 1000 km long frontline. Russian jets will operate pretty much freely.
    6
  18. Im still not sure if this is a pure Netanyahu action in tandem with Hamas to pull his neck out of the ropes for his corruption scandal, a CIA plan to have an exit strategy from the failed Ukraine situation or both.
    6
  19. And where do you get your 6000 pilots from?
    6
  20. So the Us wants to ask DJI to produce drones against China. Which is by the way a chinese company...
    6
  21. Cute that you think Russian military intel gots its info from the New York Times...
    6
  22. You still buy this sht. after the 7000th precision missile was shot?
    6
  23. Thats the size of a missile which is able to cover 100 km. Thatswhy NATO SAMs are crap.
    5
  24. They taken down the drone, because they are capable to take it down, and they will take down US spyplanes if they fly that close, thats the message. End of story.
    5
  25. Lets make that calculation dear binkov. Ukrainian objectives are: 1. cutting the Russian landbridge into half in Zaporozhia 2. Occupy South Kherson 3. Liberate Crimea 4. Storm the Donbas. If they need 2 years at least for the first objective, that would give this war a 8 years lifespan, and that is actually an optimistic estimate. Now I would tell you there is no western government who would support a decade long fight in this level.
    5
  26. I see the new shift from SBU has arrived...
    5
  27. Well, his take is quite unrealistic, and people simply had enough of this war to close it down rather than daydreaming about it I think.
    5
  28. From worst to best. T90 is basically a combination of the best parts of a T-72 (very good and robust, yet easy to service and cheap suspension, hull, engine and transmission) and the best parts of the T80 (Turret, fire control, and sights) It still suffers the same faults in the vulnerability of ammo in the auto-loader. The 125mm on it is the Same as the T-80 and proven insufficient to penetrate most western MBTs frontally even at 500 meters with tungsten ammo. The British bought some in 1992 through a third party and thoroughly tested them, then they passed some on to the Americans which we tested “Extensively” and then we passed the ones we didn’t ruin to the Germans who shortly there after began an upgrade program to their Leopards. I had the good fortune of taking part in that last round of tests. The gun launched ATGM is a band aid to help engage targets at over 3000 meters as the main gun elevation isn’t sufficient to shoot HEAT rounds past that range. In every other respect, they are inferior to a HEAT round, with the added drawback that the tank must remain stationary and exposed during the whole long flight time of the missle at that range. Later on in 2000, we did get to buy a fresh T-90 (Called a T-72BU back then) from defecting troops in Chechnya, The reactive armor was good, stopping TOW and Dragon missles. The rest was minor improvements over the T-80. At only 48 tons it is the lightest of the bunch but simple physics tells you that there just isn’t enough mass of armor there to stop a modern APFSDS round, Composite armor, while somewhat lighter than the equivalent thickness of RHA, is still very heavy, the primary benefit being that you don’t need to have a meter thick front turret to have well over a meter thickness RHAe. Were it 1.5 times as effective as The DU armor on an M1 (And it is most definitely not) The T-90 just cannot cary enough at that weight to be as well protected. The Leopard 2A4 Proved vulnerable to the T-80s gun hence the Rapid Modernization of most European Leo 2’s to 2A5 and Later 2A6 standard in the mid- late 90s and the willingness of the Germans to fire sale 2A4s to anyone with the cash. The Germans refuse to use DU ammo and found out their tungsten ammo had difficulties with the T-80 front turret at 1500m+, leading them to add barrel length to the gun (55 vs 44 lengths) to combat this. The additional Applique armor on the 2A5 proved capable of holding up to the 3BM48 depleted Uranium 125mm APFSDS. So of course the Ex-American Tanker picks the M1 right, If you are going to accuse me of jingoism, you may want to stop reading now. Well I actually was there and got to watch as a 3BM48 failed to penetrate both a Challenger 2 and an M1A1 at 1000m then again at 500m frontally. It was able to penetrate both tanks from side shots at 1000m which was concerning. Kontakt 5 reactive armor did prove to be able to disrupt an M829A2 sabot round 1 out of 3 times to the point that full penetration of the front turret was not possible, leading to the development of the M829A3 round which was designed specifically to defeat this type of armor. Mobility goes to the M1 as well, it’s governed speed is the lowest of the 3, but that is really to protect the tracks, top road speed is a useless figure in combat Acceleration is the key, getting you from one spot of cover to the next. The only tank I have ever seen out accelerate an M1 is a T80- That’s it. It will out accelerate the Leo 2 and the heavier 2A5 or 2A6 regularly as well as the T90, though admittedly the T-90 scoots very well, out-running the Leo 2A5. The M256 L/44 120mm did fine with old M829A2 APFSDS penetrating nearly 70% of the time at 2500 meters with ERA, and 100% without at 3000 meters. Sadly, we were not allowed to test M1 vs Leo vs Challenger 2, and to be honest I would not want to get hit by a HESH round from a Chally-period.
    5
  29. Rockets will fall to Kiev this christmas, and next chrismas, and the chrismas after, and the christmas 10 years from now, it will continue as long as there is a glimpse of chance that Ukraine will join NATO. There wont be electricity, food, heating, your soldiers wont get any money, they will just die on the fronts. NATO has moved on years ago, sometimes they send a van with food, or a dozen of rockets as charity. Joe Biden makes sad faces in his presidential library as an ex president, for the lost Ukrainian generation, while his successor will have a dont talk about Ukraine directive, or a dont sink money into that pit directive. Zelensky will live on his Florida apartment, as an observant who forgot even that Ukraine exists. Anti immigrant feeling will get stronger in Europe, they slowly start to deport back Ukrainian refugees. Corruption will run rampant, money will worth nothing. Thats the future of the winners.
    4
  30. Lol the US can do exactly nothing more, that it already do, and Russians know that. They won't go for a nuke war for Crimea, and they were warned not to fly there.
    4
  31. The only fact is if you want draw the end result in the middle of a match that means you desperately want to quit dear.
    4
  32. Then why they are calling themselves Russians instead of the Ukrainians calling themselves Russians?
    4
  33.  @alukard6336  Because you are f.cking with the whole world economy for a bunch of corrupt nazis in the middle of nowhere?
    4
  34. As far as I remeber the downing of the Nighthawk happened in the Kosovo conflict, while Srebrenica and vukovar happened a decade earlier in the Balkans war. So in any case this bombing was more or less unjustified, and violates international law as much as Russian occupation of Crimea.
    4
  35.  @akse  Ukraine need to protect the whole Ukraine. If they dont do it, then Russians will fly in deep and bomb their supply lines, which is actually worse than what they can do on the frontlines.
    4
  36. If I would fly drones in 1000 mile distances I would simply use a submarine as the control hub, instead of building huge motherplanes.
    4
  37. I think its time to make a video about the world famous Russian shovel strikes!
    4
  38. Lol yeah mercenaries. Well sorry to inform you, but none of the rules of war applies to mercenaries, so anyone caught without an AFU or NATO badge is royally screwed. And since these guys are not idiots, they would ask a royal sum for their services. Mercenaries are good as special or auxiliary troops, not as the bulk force of an army.
    4
  39. The leaks are for you, dear, military professionals know this for months...
    4
  40. Combined arms doctrine means you have jets on the sky dear. Please stop this dumbass idiotism. At least not comment such BS in a military channel.
    4
  41. Those are excellent targets for anti radiation missiles.
    4
  42. Lol I like your animation where those Amrican warplanes just appear literally out of the blue above the Middle Eastern skies. Of course the inconveninet truth is, that without the carrier fleet camping in the Mediterranean those planes wouldnt show up. And the Mediterranean is literally in the other side of the globe to taiwan.
    4
  43.  @sharkfinbite  Even the Israelis sunk US ships who did that.
    4
  44. Lol Ukraine has the same shitty tanks. Now we will see how much firecrackers western catsies are.
    4
  45. Well, for a strange reason western powers still didnt give downtown London or New York to form the jewish state but arabic lands, which is kindof strange thinking.
    3
  46. Russia have the air defence what ukraine lost...
    3
  47.  @TKUA11  You mean when the Ukrie saints shelled Donbas for 8 years?
    3
  48. Why should they learn anything? Germany is a pro russian state Im quite sure they know everything.
    3
  49. Never count on the mistakes of your enemy...
    3
  50. No dear, you are objectively wrong again. Russians dont fly sorties deep into Ukrainian territory, because their SAMs cant tell which plane is Russian and which plane is Ukrainian. Most of those Russian planes shot down in the early phase of the war were actually friendly fire. I would tell, thats even more embarassing from a certain viewpoint. The tactical situation now is quite easy for them. Anything what flies deep inside Ukraine is Ukrainian. If Ukrainian SAMs would be such a problem, they wouldnt use their FABs all over the frontline, they are literally doing flyovers with their Su25s above poor Ukie soldiers.
    3
  51.  @gregmchale5011  Lol who was clever enough to dodge drafting in Ukraine wont just go back to die. Any able bodied ukrainian returning to ukraine in wartime would be an ideal candidate for the frontline, since he is not necessary otherwise for the war effort.
    3
  52. Well Binkov you researched poorly again. Ukraine already used up its arti mines. Why do you think Russians have lost that many tanks to mines in Vuhledar? Because Ukries artied up the roads, tha russians cleaned before with those.
    3
  53. Lol that OSINT, which showed a tank destroyed 10 times? First of all, even if a tank is damaged hardly by an FPV drone it doesnt mean its beyond repair. Look at WWII statistics, in any given offensive 50% of the tanks were damaged but repairable. And it actually takes quite a lot of pnishment, to finish off a tank. That means you see FPV drones hunting the same vehicle over and over again. Thats an OK procedure but OSINT regularly made mistakes counting 1 tank as 10.
    3
  54. It flew 10 miles off the Crimean coast. International airspace generally starts at 40 miles off the coast, besides they declared no fly zone there, so they have every right to shoot down anything which goes into there.
    3
  55. Why it is crazy? Its kind of logical, that they learned better to wagon than to be wagoned.
    3
  56. Well US missiles are crappy compared to the European ones. Meteor missiles use ramjet, so they have superior maneuverability and range to the AMRAAMS an IRIS T has thrust vectoring, while sidewinder doesn't. I guess Chinese know full well what is the future in missile tech, they don't want to copy cold war era junk.
    3
  57.  @shingetsu10  Who begs them to help? Last time I checked they rather invaded other countries without invitation, with the best interpretation given is that they wanted to have their revenge, but they never go against their peers. Theres the commercial, and the real life, but they generally differ.
    3
  58. Better hurry up, according to the leaks, they are finished by the end of may.
    3
  59.  @Matt.Willoughby  You mean the name of Republic of China? Only you call them Taiwan.
    3
  60. Why do you think Russia will stand down with its war? It can last for 10+ years. The question is that the west is interested in such a long coflict, if it is not, the ukrainians will forgive them or not, and that even it will or will not be possible to form a stable government on the shtpile, which will remain out of Ukraine. Putin made it crystal clear this is not about territories.
    3
  61. ​ @blairrobert3438  Where did you hear that? Let me guess. CNN or BBC.
    3
  62.  @longshucksgaming  It would be better to decide if Putin is weak af, and can't even invade Ukraine, or he is so strong, that he won't stop till the capture of Paris, because both can't be true at the same time.
    3
  63.  @ackwebde  Well, Gustve Prien in his good days went in into Scapa Flow, and sank 3 battleships there. Does that lucky shot made the British navy not to send out its fleet? We all know, that Russians aren't really afraid of the Ukries, why would they, they literally have nothing in the sea to counter them. Also HARM wont help out Ukraine too much, their target aquisition radars aren't even in Ukraine, and their AA batteries are operating on networked mode, so they can't be spotted just when they fire. I would still remind anyone, but this time its not NATO fighting some Serbs with limited AA capacities, its Russia, which actually have more AA capacities, than NATO itself. Plus a 1000 airplane. So 190 S-300 battery 400 BUK battery and a few thousand manpad and 1000 airplane can't stop 300 F16, lets be a little bit skeptical about that.
    3
  64. Yeah, I still dont get it why dont we vote in the UN that the US should give Texas and New mexico to the Palestinians in return fro the territory of Israel. North America is huge, people who live there could migrate northwards.
    3
  65.  @TKUA11  Well, Volodymir, the good times have passed, when you could bend the truth without impunity. Nowadays, you have to mingle some realism to your words. So you tell me that English Ukrie experts dont know what SBU is, but they are overly confident about their oppinions in the Russian Ukrainian war. I guess thats what we call the Russel paradox.
    3
  66. Well you leave out the economic impact of energetic sanctions on the west. So this conflict does not cost us mere 100 dollars annually, rather 1/4th of the total revenue of an average citizen. Which is unsustainable on the long run. Sanctions must go, direct economic and military aid can be heghtened.
    3
  67. Noone believes Ukraine lasts long enough for a profitable batch of production could be started. Even if it would, without other potential buyers its a risky venture. They cant pay, and other's willingness to pay is questionable.
    3
  68.  @havenmist2216  Well, Wagner is a PMC, maybe Ukries should hire them...
    3
  69. ​ @TheAir2142  Yeah, well, no. They will go back to normal as they did when they were Soviets.
    3
  70. Americans bought them 500.000 from South Korea.
    2
  71.  @frednitney5831  Well, if you cant handle the truth. I guess its more humane than the lunatic asylums we had 100 years ago...
    2
  72.  @KirkFickert  Im not a mathematician, but 14000 dead divided by 8 years is not 10-12 civilian per year. Besides is there any limit on how much civilian is a warcrime? Russians killed 30.000 in the whole Ukraine campaign, its a lot compared to donbas, its nothing compared to Iraq, where americans killed 1 million.
    2
  73. ​ @alexd832  Problem is, that the UN or the SEC wrote reports that the minority situation in Ukraine is dire, but not a single European power dealt with it. As far as I know in the Baltics they don't give citizenship to ethnic Russians, who lived there before they became independent, and thats a serious human right abuse. Like it or not, Russians would have an excellent excuse to invade them. To solve these questions peacefully first of all, they have to be addressed, not pushed under the rug, because these will lead to wars.
    2
  74.  @Haunuva  Should we create some safe space for Ukrie fans?
    2
  75. ​ @nakdad  Honestly what you currently spend your money on is not an Ukraine win, but a Russian kill as much as possible scenario. But that intrinsically means, that Ukraine will lose. But as your media saying 24/7 Russia is not a near peer competitor of the US, its completely pointless and pricey to bleed them out this way. It is entirely possible it will cost you Taiwan.
    2
  76. Lol, if it is on your inventory books, and its not officially given away, or sitting on the shelves, then someone goes to jail.
    2
  77.  @avegromek  Lol where did the FSB admitted anything about Russian casualties?
    2
  78. Oh BTW Leo 2 A4-s were actually tested against T-90's. Thatswhy they were firesaled in the 90's.
    2
  79.  @seanlander9321  The location is strategically significant because it controls United States spy satellites as they pass over one-third of the globe, including China, North Korea, the Asian parts of Russia, and the Middle East.
    2
  80. Its not really needed, believe me or not, but attack subs would make an absolute impact in any invasion fleet even before any chinese captain would just think those are around.
    2
  81. You mean the ones which burned by thousands at the Battle of Kursk? Nothing new.
    2
  82. Well, five submarines actively pinging will find and destroy one sneaky. Yeah noise levels are crucial, but not entirely decisive. Nuclear attack subs are never a joke. Even diesel electric ones are dangerous.
    2
  83. Who did tell ya that NATO would sacrifice personnel for Crimea or the Donbas? Its highly unlikely, and serves no strategic interest for any NATO member, even if NATO decides, that it will protect Ukraine. A more likely scenario would be a clear demarkation line along the Dnipro, that would give the strategic buffer between NATO and Russia. I even doubt that will hapeen, although it would make sense.
    2
  84. We know the exact numbers, since all of the donors were pretty much commercializing how great guys they are. Besides they just cant make their rockets disappear, because some people would think that was stolen.
    2
  85.  @ChucksSEADnDEAD  It was on the official list of weapons shipments, as far as I remember... Last time when US sent weapons covertly it was tha Iran Contra thing, and some people got jailed for it.
    2
  86. Well, its not that much about noise, but speed and noise. Cavitation is a function of water pressure, the higher your sub is on the water column the slower speed it starts to cavitate, which means that in shallow waters the sub can only move really slowly. Thats a tactical disadvantage, but not an enormous game changer, subs with regular propulsion are still usable. Focusing on the blade design is a more important factor, because if its badly manufactured, then the sub will be noisy almost regardless of its speed.
    2
  87. The problem of the US is not technical but political. Maybe they would be capable to fight two major wars, but they simply dont have the political will anymore to do that.
    2
  88.  @danielstruwig3078  Well, in chess terms they are sending in their knight now, that they elimeinated the Ukrie rook.
    2
  89.  @danielstruwig3078  They didnt since their airforce is pretty much intact. The pawns were the drones, who took out the rook.
    2
  90.  @danielstruwig3078  Reality? Why do you think Americans leaking these documents to you? So that an Ukrainian defeat wont come out of the blue after a year of lying.
    2
  91.  @ChucksSEADnDEAD  Dozens... From a thousand. Its pretty much intact.
    2
  92.  @th3merper190  Well Germans had better tanks, the Tiger, better planes, the Me-262 and better subs, than anything the allies had to offer and still lost the war to quantity... Lesson to learn dont base your defense on wonderweapons.
    2
  93. @Phillip Banes America lost almost all of its wars.
    2
  94. They dont steal that much as US weapons manufacturers do....
    2
  95.  @bobbinsgaming3028  Its slow, hard to operate, and its service ceiling is not that better than a conventional fighterjet of today. It had its time in the 60's but today its an obsolete plane flying on the mercy of its adversaries.
    2
  96.  @OnNom808  Then send in 1000 F-16's for Christs sake, just close this down. And forget that barking on the Taiwan strait. We dont have money for these wars. Either you do it, or your western shts will be ditched by everyone once and for all, because we had enough. You are dreaming, that India is standing with you, China is standing with you, Brasil is standing with you, in reality noone is standing with you, because you went insane. This war could be avoided by a simple promise to Russia, and we dont care about the pendant of the free will bullshite you are feeding after making that coup.
    2
  97.  @MrRedsjack  What didn't you understand on the we dont care part? You know what your politicians are doing? They are running around the world threatening everyone to vote to the "right" thing in the UN, and have those idiotic sanctions. What do you think for how long will we tolerate this? You have this on paper awesome NATO shit and you still cant finish off this campaign without our assistance? Thats ridiculous. And you didnt even finish this, because you will start anotherone in Taiwan, the one on which even the Europeans will ditch this insanity. USA wants a world war? How about everyone takes up arms and silence them once and for all.
    2
  98.  @LizardSpork  Yes you better take into account human rights or you will be invaded, thats the lesson to be taken away.
    2
  99. Lol they use AMRAAM missiles, which is an air to air missile. Its really crappy even compared to a buk. You know these rockets are designed to shoot from a jet which travels at Mach 1 not to be fired from the ground.
    2
  100.  @johnroberts9922  Well, maybe they do their job, if they use it as intended, if they dont, then its quite a mediocre missile.But no AMRAAMs are pretty outdated. They use solid fuel boosters, which means they accelerate as long as they can, and then try to glide to their target on the terminal phase of their trajectory, so they are pretty much avoidable. Meteor missiles are the most advanced AA missiles in existence,they use ramjet, so they can maneuver extremely well even in the terminal phase.
    2
  101. Well, the US can get away with money creation, because Saudis, Europeans, Japanese, Koreans, and even the Chinese are all financing it. Thats not a normal economic process forever, it is the case since the Bretton woods system was replaced in the 70s with petrodollar. From that on US puts its deficit on foreign nations, who are paying the debt for having a stable world system. The problem is the US thinks it can go to isolationism. Well, it can, but then foreign investment would dry up, everyone would only accept a money backed by raw materials or manufactured products and not dollars.  @Rägarded 
    2
  102. Lol why do you put a missile into a high mobility launcher if the launher will be stationed on a 300 m wide reef, where it cant even turn around? Corruption?
    2
  103. FABs didnt even mentioned in this, to which Ukraine absolutley have no response to...
    2
  104. Excellent delivery system for a nukie. No ABM will catch it.
    2
  105. Lol we have these sea drones for quite some time although these were called torpedoes previously.
    2
  106. If that would be the case we would see it in Ukraine dont you think... @davout5775 
    2
  107. Shall I ask why do you think that Rusians wouldn't use their navy in such a situation, and let Ukrainian imaginary fighterjets to cross the Black sea, and wouldn't use their firepower to suppress advancing Ukrainian troops from the sea? Also you make an argument, that a 1000 strong Russian airforce can't break through ukrainian AD, and after that you argue, that with 300 F-16's ukrainians could break through Russian AD, we see how nonsensical that is. BTW using ORYX data is kindof unprofessional, those numbers are highly questionable, rather considered as war propaganda. We have more reliable sources regarding to this, such as the MOSSAD, which reports are actually somewhat supported by other casualty calculations.
    2
  108.  @THEROOT1111  Well thats optimistic because Germans were able to actually hold most of Crimea in WWII up to 1945 with way less connection to the bulk of the German army then wht the Russians have to mainland Russia. And of course more terriotries Ukraine take, more concentrated Russian forces become. I dont think Russia actually intend to make a serious landgrab besides what they already took. It is a pretty well defendable line.
    2
  109.  @CountryLifestyle2023  They key word what you mentioned is were. What they occupied in this tranche strategically makes a lot of sense. It makes Crimea connected to the Russian mainland, which was their problem since 2014, and occupied the highground from where Ukraine shelled Donbas for years. Maybe in the future they plan another invasion, but for now they would be pretty much content with these results.
    2
  110.  @ElementalWarrior1999  Because most of these systems were never intended to be massproduced, they are literally hand crafted by very high skill workforce in almost in the prototype stage.
    2
  111. Well, no, its stated that they are better than the Los Angeles class. They are on par with the Seawolf approximately.
    2
  112. Dont fly 10 miles off another country's shoreline with malign intent, and you won't be fired at.
    2
  113.  @keitht24  Well the moment you started to fck with the Russians, all of what you say went to null. China can get what it wants through them, oil, gas, food, you name it. End of story. A startegically debilitated story. You lost this the moment you made them allies.
    2
  114.  @OhNotThat  Yeah you should give Ukraine money catapults instead, because you have the money, but you cant produce the weapons. Literally, you have to wait 9 years for a NASAMS.
    2
  115.  @OhNotThat  Lol no it wont I guarantee that. Just listen to Macron, he pretty much had enough, and he is not alone. This war will be over this year one way or another, everyone knows it, even Zelensky knows it.
    2
  116.  @aguynamedscott11  Better push for it, because otherwise it will be just told them to accept anything that Russia wants. They are not in a position to say no to any of their backers, they wouldnt survive a day without constant bailouts and weapons shipments.
    2
  117. Why do you think they make their cruise missile strikes? All missile or drone downed by an S-300 is one less S-300 used against them. They are using gliding bombs near the frontlines now and gravity bomb attacks such depleted are the ukrainian air defenses. Sooner than later they will achieve air superiority, if the west doesnt find out how to send them AA in meaningful quantities.
    2
  118. Well, if they save their ammo, that means, they let through Russian aviation to do whatever they want to do...
    2
  119. Well Ukraine is not part of the European Union while Denmark is, so your point is pretty much moot.
    2
  120. I doubt Americans can defend it. Canada or Iceland wont give you logistical support for such a takeover, which means your closest base is as far as China's closest base.
    2
  121.  @BroadHobbyProjects  True, Germans firesaled all of their A4's when they tested them with a Chechen captured T90. It was faster, lighter, better armored, and shoot straight through the frontal quadrant of the Leo from 1500 m.
    2
  122. Based on what? Your imagination?
    2
  123. Yeah, you know ehn Russians did half of what you wrote, your european and american friends couldnt cry more about war crimes and the Hague, and they are not that idiot to get 6 billion angry people to whitewash such a double standard because they dont have the military might to stop them.
    2
  124. Lol they are just beating the cr.p out of NATO. Noone will respect the west when they finish.
    2
  125.  @bigpoop112  Outaccelerate not outmaneuver.
    2
  126. The New Atlas with Brian Berletic, Willy OAM, HistoryLegends, Col Douglas McGregor.
    2
  127. I dont think its wise to remind Ukraine's biggest weapon supplier, about what some drunken slavs did to them 70 years ago... @ldkbudda4176 
    2
  128. So what? You shoot your torps, everybody knows you are there, and your awesome US sub is simply hunted down by a swarming ASW force. So to be safe the awesome US sub can awesomely sit in the water doing nothing.
    2
  129. So you want NATO in. Nothing else can stop the Russians. It was a pipedream from the start that Ukraine is enough. They have no time to learn to use F-35's, or F16's in quantity enough to break Russian air defense.
    2
  130. Facts are facts buddy... @grafvonscyth2928 
    2
  131. I translate it to you: in 1945 USA already sold out Ukraine to the Soviet Union, and they were idiots not to arm themselves with nukes instead of waiting for daddy NATO to rescue them. On one hand he is maybe right, on the other hand neither the US nor Russia would let them to have Euromaidan festivals, if they were a nuclear nation back then, because thats kindof risky if far right idiots get their hands on weapons of mass destruction.  @davidporter7051 
    2
  132. You start to realize that war is a racket? Well it is.
    2
  133. If they would be then there wouldnt be a need for the Balfour declaration. But I still dont get it, how can you give something, what does not belongs to you. @Darkseidsolosfiction 
    1
  134. Does that mean, they can form a Palestine state there?  @OldManRocketLeague 
    1
  135. Well, no, since jewish is an ethnicity while Islam is a religion. But even if we take that to face value more than half of the jewish population is actually khazar in origin, which was a kingdom in modern day Ukraine what for some strange reason adopted jewish customs in the late medieval period of 800-900 AD.  @OldManRocketLeague 
    1
  136. Well I read the seven pillars of wisdom from T.E. Lawrence, who was the liaison officer to the Arab insurgents against the Ottoman empire, but I didnt read any jewish assistance there. @OldManRocketLeague 
    1
  137.  @LewLewVuitton  Yeah they will definitely hand it to the Ukries. If they wanna spare it for the Taiwan conflict it would better placed in South Korea.
    1
  138.  @tomwhittaker9461  3 months with their actual consumption. That can be a big relief.
    1
  139.  @IONindustries627  Its not likely that even if they win anyone would see their money back.
    1
  140. Well, if we are talking about what armor could be possibly used, Ukraine's breach near Robotine looks like an excellent cauldron, which screams for a pincer movement from Russians from the east and west to cut them off.
    1
  141. ​ @ApolloGGG  Well, yeah you solved a few strategic problems of China recently.
    1
  142.  @klowen7778  You know the main part of fighting a successful war is deception. Kyiv was doomed its operational success the moment they are disputing the direction of their main thrust. Putin only needs to put his forces there. Problem solved.
    1
  143. Thats the Belgorod...
    1
  144. Wouldnt a simple smokescreen blown by the first tank more I dont know prudent solution?
    1
  145. The US leaked it, so CNN and other MSM outlets at least save some face if Ukraine will be defeated, that they werent entirely untrustworthy.
    1
  146.  @kyb5203  As long as noone can rotate a laser turret in mach 6, its pretty much pointless excersise. The solution will be a highly maneuverable AG missile.
    1
  147. Yeah, Binkov, its a pretty old stuff between military analysts, to speculate on when Ukraine runs out of SAM's.
    1
  148. You cant start a war after thisone. NATO has to replenish its stockpiles, rebuild its economies etc.
    1
  149.  @alexd832  Russian minority problem has to be solved in Ukraine anyway. And in the Baltics as well. Too long Europe tried to pretend that its not their problem.
    1
  150.  @pepe-zw4de  Well one thing is for sure, it will be less likely Greenalnders will let Americans build bases in Greenland, because those are security risks now.
    1
  151. If you want to subsitute the S300 you can pretty much forget anything except the Patriot. Iris T Crotale and NASAMS are bullcrap. Maybe THAAD could be used. It would be extremely wasteful, but it would do the job.
    1
  152.  @timmyhoward6638  Yes maybe that would work too.
    1
  153.  @vredacted3125  Well, no he didnt write that. He wrote that Ukraine received territories from Lenin and Kruschev which were never ukrainian before, thats different.
    1
  154.  @vredacted3125  Isnt Rusyn an ethnic group living in Southern Ukraine? They are neither Ukrainian nor Russian. Nor does it matter, Russians would be better off, if they would call themselves Mongolians. The original inhabitants of present day Ukraine were the Scythians, who are essentially Mongolians.
    1
  155. ​ @vredacted3125  Thats a quite common tradition from Scythians to Huns up to tartars turkish and Mongolians to shave their head before going into battle. Besides modern day nomad nations pretty much think the Mongolians as a brother nation from Iran to Turkiye through Kazakhstan to Uzbegistan, so its safe to suppose the original Scythians and Sarmathians considered them as relatives, all of these nations are originated from the Afghan Uighur parts of Asia somewhat 20.000 years ago. They have the similar mythology from the tree of life to the magic deer who lead them to their home, Sarmatian and Scythian burial sites are full of these mythological references as well, what you cant really find in indogerman or slavic mythology, maybe tha closest reference is the legend of St Hubert, but I think its a later adoption from Attila the Hun's time. Its nice to know it influenced the Cossacs, but cossacs by no means are their descendants.
    1
  156. Lol Soren, then I guess, you have to give your gas and oil cheaper, otherwise not much choice left.
    1
  157.  @srenclausen8534  Since renewables require natural gas turbines as backup, thats rather a bad news for Ukraine. If we would go for coal, thatone we can produce domestically.
    1
  158.  @srenclausen8534  Yep, Germans detonated their last NPP yesterday.
    1
  159.  @srenclausen8534  Good for the Finns, but they arent the main manufacturers in Europe.
    1
  160. Lol its maneuvering, so its the definition of not predictable, because it can turn whenever its ordered.
    1
  161.  @kenm3943  Yeah, nazi Germany was well known from its free thinkers...
    1
  162. Yeah, thatswhere Biden always misses the mark. He knew full well, that the Afghan army will eventually collapse to the taliban, even told it to the media, yet he hoped that they can hold out until the congress is voted in. Now the problem was that Afghans read the media, and the whole frontline collapsed in a week in a self fulfilling prophecy.
    1
  163.  @mtpaley1  Well, thatswhy Germans did beat the crap out of Britain before the yanks joined. But actually they were considered weaker by a wide margin, just French-British tactics was so inferior Germans could steamroll their troops.
    1
  164. We would be most grateful if US wouldnt interfere with European politics but they do. You have an enormous responsibility for this war from Bush up to Biden, while French and Germans were actively pushing for more cooperative approach.
    1
  165. If you want to take on a ship you send a torp against it, its more effective than any actual missile.
    1
  166. Do you think that with 20% inflation they have to spend a dime to have some pretty angry people, who are asking questions about why to continue this war?
    1
  167.  @DannyB-cs9vx  Well it takes a year to manufacture 400 javelins, so regardless of their costs they can be outproduced by T72s.
    1
  168.  @MaxTheLegend_YT  Lol after 7000 cruise missile shot you still buy into this washing machine crap?
    1
  169.  @MaxTheLegend_YT  Lol, US used 500 tomahawks in their Iraqi campaign, they dont even have 7000 cruise missiles total. Binkov didnt tell ya, because he is not a real military analist, but the realones actually warned about this.
    1
  170.  @TheGreatDrAsian  You mean when they pushed the Americans out of North Korea?
    1
  171. Dont bother, that the Canal is actually in the Kherson region...
    1
  172.  @TKUA11  Yeah, whats wrong with asking about the money stuff? They could spend on more useful projects...
    1
  173. They dont need missiles if they can fly jets, thats the point.
    1
  174. It is real, it was speculated from january between military analysts, of when they will run out...
    1
  175.  @akizeta  Well, they could buy 7000 missiles on the money which gave NATO 20 missile launchers. Guess who is corrupt now.
    1
  176.  @MostlyPennyCat  We kindof have the answer for that. Obama explicitly forbade to fly F22s above Lybia, because its too expensive to lose.
    1
  177.  @createdforthemoment6740  US could do that, although they would loose a sizable amount of their airfleet. Russian air defense is designed specifically for them.
    1
  178.  @bogdankozak7656  Meanhile Zelensky and Klichko kids are drinking their Martinis in Germany... So much about citizenship and responsibility...
    1
  179.  @Nick-wh4jt  Well, no my friend, Egyptians wrote its name as Pelestein in the Menepthas stele dates back to 1208 BC. You know if you want to forge history the worst place to do it is in China and the Middle East, because they have 5000 years old archives.
    1
  180.  @fatnlazychinc  China in the Korean war. Lets say politely that it was an even.
    1
  181.  @mikeyourbag8997  Yeah, on the other hand US could only stop them by making nuclear threats because otherwise they would just push the whole US expedition force into the sea. Thatswhy its an even, not a clear cut victory.
    1
  182.  @mikeyourbag8997  That non playing character made the whole US military to run. Which is not bad since 20 years earlier they were beaten by the Japs. At least contemporary Americans thought its a bunder, because McArthur had to resign and Truman had to leave the White house.
    1
  183. So letse be absolutely clear here. Theres no way of BVR aerial combat without some of the planes actually using their radars therefore giving their positions. Missiles dont find their target in 100 km engagements without a command plane directing their glidepath via datalink. And since the Russians have a dedicated AWACS killer in the form of the Mig31, which can outrun any NATO brick they would throw against it that wouldnt be a secure thing to fly those sitting ducks. So no dear, your stealth does not worth a dime in engagement. Noto to mention that even if NATO would have double their air advantage in the sheer number of planes, since those fighterjets are overcomplicated sht, their availability in any given time is sometimes less than 50%, which means yeah you have the jet, but you cant actually fly it, if you need to.
    1
  184.  @farnthboy  Why to leave it, if you wanna reconquer it? As far as simpletons go attackers always have a greater casualty than defenders.
    1
  185.  @caseychaffin5445  Most people speculating, that the SAMs will be near the frontlines or the cities, so if they cross it, they are free to operate. And since they have comms they can probe where are the SAMs.
    1
  186.  @alexd832  Because Ukrie S300's are running low now?
    1
  187. They use them mainly against Drones. You know the 25000 dollar ones.
    1
  188.  @recoil53  Finland doesnt have a port in the Arctic.
    1
  189.  @californiabreeze2182  Well, no you cant go from 0 to 10000 miles per hour in a fraction of a second. Noone can. Rockets arent that efficient.
    1
  190.  @KrisWustrow  Do the UN push the red button on nukes, or how is it important of what do they think?
    1
  191.  @KrisWustrow  They give a shite to legal claims my friend, those times are over. They have the force to get what they want, and at the end of the day thats what is count. You can sue them if you wish, but noone has the power to bring them into court.
    1
  192.  @johnroberts9922  People are just people. If you give a dollar to a beggar you want the world to know how good a person you are, you wont slip that to him secretly.
    1
  193.  @banteo  Well, there is literally two potential entity which can direct Mossad not to notice such preaprations. The first is of course the state of Israel itself, the second is American intelligence, who by the way also didnt notice a thing. About the motive both of them would have a pretty strong interest in this war.
    1
  194.  @zix_zix_zix  That means, if they go there, they will be shot down. You know, it means the same as US did over Libya.
    1
  195.  @samuel.andermatt  There is a reason why ukrainaian casualties are opaque. Of course NATO knows the exact number, they have a ton of satellites and aerial recon above Ukraine. If they dont publish it, means, it is actually worse than those estimates. But it doesnt really count Ukraine can sustain those numbers, NATO knows it and they dont want to demoralize the troops.
    1
  196.  @rohanthandi4903  And after that what? China is still a few miles away, while the US is still an ocean away...
    1
  197.  @rohanthandi4903  Again, the problem is set. Everyone knows how to beat the US. They cant fight a war on the long run. So whoever stays resilient longer, wins, thats that simple.
    1
  198. Musk is plain right. If the adversary can jam the drone it can jam the datalink of an AMRAAM missile too, so those wont find their target. The radar of the missile itself only helps during the terminal phase of the glidepath, the missile have to be guided up until that point. There wont be precise 100 miles shots. That means any human piloted stealthplane basicaly have to go into dogfighting range. Now the F35 is a legendarily bad dogfighter, basically a 40 years old Flanker can outmaneuver and outgun it. So either some can maintain the datalink under EW conditions, in which case you can use a drone for the job as well, or you need to build a way better human piloted fighter than the F35, which wont be specialized in BVR engagements.
    1
  199.  @kkrolik2106  So what would they do, if their fighter would be shot down? Nothing, they don't want a nuclear war, and they got the message.
    1
  200. You mean, it would simply switch to its thermal view. Which tanks have fpv drones dont have.
    1
  201.  @WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq  You Americans even lost to Canada mate... Not Russian style, Canadians actually pillaged and burned down Washington DC.
    1
  202. We cant have a clear vision since we dont control the events in it. We cant tell the Ukrianians not to do some things, and although we can tell the russians to fck off, they just dont care. To be honest, its objectively not our war, we just give stuff to it.
    1
  203. Lol, and then what? Becoming an apartheid state with muslim majority with no voting rights?
    1
  204. Mainly the fact destroying US military industrial complex, that engineers are better payed in the civil sector in jobs, where they dont have to kill anyone.
    1
  205. If they run low, then SEAD missions will be feasible against them. Its way easier to take out a single AA battery than a bunched networked together.
    1
  206.  @johnnyspliff4421  That actually does mean, that you have exactly 0 cards what you didn't already played out to counter the Russians.
    1
  207. Since your patriots cant be at everywhere at once no matter how many jets Russia sends you pretty much need the same number of air defense.
    1
  208.  @stefthorman8548  The EU has a mutual defense pact, which is kinda stornger than NATO and involves neutral countries as well.
    1
  209.  @bobbinsgaming3028  Lol why?
    1
  210.  @DavidSmith-yi8ou  Yep, we can do it, and the Russians can use their tactical nukes. So then we spent billions to send them a tank bataillon, which will be wiped out by a 100.000 USD worth of warhead. It was always on the table, in the cold war, when NATO did not have the numbers they did have the Davey Crockett nuke launchers. Lets be realistic, Ukraine cant win this conflict, because Russia is way more devoted to win than we are. I think the only solution is to modify the NATO charter and explicitly state, that it can't go easwards, and in tandem get a promise form Putin, that he won't block Ukraine-s EU membership. That way it won't be NATO sphere of influence, but won't be Russian sphere of influence too, it will be a neutral middleground.
    1
  211. I dont think Taiwan is NATO's problem.
    1
  212. Yeah, well, no. Ukrainians were realitvely successful, which means that ther 1000 baterries could take out 200 Russian batteries out of the 7000. Overall Russia still has an overwhelming advantage. Meanwhile they tracked russian artillery positions they left their stormtroopers totally exposed, that was one reason why the counteroffensive failed.
    1
  213. Nope, those are the western numbers. Meanwhile the AFU completely put the blame of the loss of Avdiivka of the artillery disparity between them and the Russians.
    1
  214.  @aguynamedscott11  Yeah we get that you have the money, but from where will you get the weapons? Its not like a Wallmart that you go in for 100 patriot rockets, you have what you are able to produce. And your production is a meh. Seriously 60 Tomahawk yearly? 400 javelins? It will take 20 years just to resupply what you already gave to Ukraine.
    1
  215. Well, Brits didnt have to use radio navigation, because their pilots were better trained in stellar navigation and they could read their position that way. I never heared german pilots used sextants as frequently as the brits.
    1
  216. The main problem of the F35 is ts 50% reliability. You buy 100 of them you can send 50 of those into battle at any given time, the others will be in service. And its a horribly expensive plane to have surplusses. If I would be Finland I would still buy the Gripen, it has superior sensors, can land anywhere, not requiring a dedicated airfield you can change even its jetengines in 15 minutes if needed and send it back to combat. Its the airplane designed to be used in a high tech guerilla warfare against a numerically superior airforce. F35 is good if you already have the superior airforce. Also in a real war scenario I think the Moscow raid would be quite low amongst the priorities.
    1
  217.  @pekkoh75  Yeah an F35 can land at anywhere since it has a VTOL capability if you order with it, but you cant service an F35 anywhere, so the problem remains, meanwhile the Gripen comes with a road mobile service station. To preserve its capabilities it has to be recoated after pretty much every 10 sorties in a dedicated facility. So yeah, if you have to fly some specialized stealth missions in highly contested airspace, then the F35 rules, although even that is not a mission type which cant be done cheaper with a simple stealthy cruise missile. In a battle of attrition, it will fly its 10 sorties and stuck on ground, or will be as good as any regular jet would be. Its an excellent force multiplier, especially if you have the advantage to begin with, but I dont think its wise to be used as the backbone of any airforce, its simply a too needy jet to do that.
    1
  218. It just doesnt makes sense compared to a fix point defence. Chinese know where the islands are so I would rather focus on the protection of the site. It would be somehat more beneficial if a sub could fire them.  @leonfa259 
    1
  219. Well, he told, how could they win, if they would have everything what they asked for, and conquered everything which they didn't. I still feel, that even that picture is Rosy, because Russia has its navy at her disposal.
    1
  220. Lol, so what?
    1
  221. I dont want to sadden you, but handbuilding is exactly how western high tech weapons produced. Why do you think you build 100 tomahawks in a year and 200 Javelins, when Russia produces 3000 Kalibrs in the same time? That means it takes a factory more than a day to produce a single handheld rocket launcher, well it doesnt sound mass production to me. Ukes get 100 Leo2s a year, meanwhile Russians produce 800 T72/90. It takes 7 years to build a Patriot batterry 5 years to build a NASAMS battery, and these can be supplied by 500 missiles annually.
    1
  222. Greenland is already swarming with American prospectors, who fail, because its not easy to get resources out of a 2 miles deep icelayer.
    1
  223.  @thunderspark1536  Century? As far as I know they lost a total of 500.000 people killed or injured, and they have a 3 million pool. So with that consumption rate, it is enough for them for 6 years.
    1
  224. Lol what did you expect in an armchair general channel?
    1
  225.  @oze1999  Well, not exactly rather Ukraine learns now that Sun Tzu maxim about never underestimate thy enemy....
    1
  226.  @scottkrater2131  Well, the question is still the same, does one Leopard worth 4 T72? And the answer is that 4 T72 makes mincemeat out of the Leppie.
    1
  227. Its not that easy to use any electronics if the missile is covered in a plasma cloud.
    1
  228. Have you looked into the map recently Russia/China together have half the world as their coastline. Alaska to the Philippines is exactly 10% of that which the US can blockade. Not to mention, that Chinese fleet is indeed bigger, and they can use any antiship missile launched from the mainland.
    1
  229.  @mattBLACKpunk  You can search for old Vice news footage. They frequented Donbas quite a bit from 2014, so we know some of it is true.
    1
  230. You maybe just start to get why Americans dont send their F-16's there...
    1
  231. Where they will get their missiles, if ammo trains become prey to Russian military aviation?
    1
  232. The original concept of the MiG-31 interceptor was actually to outspeed the F15 escorts, and go straight for the AWACS. After the AWACS was shot down, it had its own multi targeting radar designating targets for other planes to hunt.
    1
  233. First of all Russian mobicks dont go to the frontline. They do the border patrol in other parts of Russia, and the professional army corps, who are relieved, go to Ukraine. So even if Putin makes a general mobilization, that wouldnt put thatmuch political pressure on him. Secondly those contract soldiers are not all Russian at all. Russia pretty much uses any kind of mercenary whom they can get their hands on.
    1
  234.  @christopherh2570  Of course they did. On the other hand Russia pays better...
    1
  235. Everybody with a right sense thinks that you have to dogfight with a near peer airforce. Gulf war and Vietnam seriously guys, so the Vietnamese airforce was near peer to the US airforce? Us could send anything unharmed into vietnamese airspace, it was a miracle if they ever seen an enemy airplane. Its easy when you fly your AWACS everywhere like theres no tomorrow to make a turkeyshoot 100 miles away, but a real adversary wouldnt let your AWACSes to just fly around. This is a big dream to shoot down enemy airplanes from a great distance, which a lot of military planners are falling into continuously.
    1
  236.  @rowaystarco  Yes they would be a legit target, but Norwegians only have the guts to blow up German pipelines, not to be cocky with Russian pilots.
    1
  237.  @matejbabjak9678  As a Mexican a US military agression is way more likely for them I guess. And the second think I guess is Poland would give as much about it, as when Americans used Polish bases to interrogate iraquis whom they found suspicious.
    1
  238.  @spartanonxy  Lol Chinese are commies. They can order anything they want about their population aims. If they could achieve the one children policy, they can achieve the many girls policy as well. They will never have population problems as the Japs or the west has.
    1
  239.  @Spectre4913  Yeah sure the country which ordered that one family can only have one children cant order that abortion is illegal, or any other thing to maintain its population. Problem is, that Americans are calculating with China as where there are liberal rules are at play, while they are a central planned government.
    1
  240.  @WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq  US is the only western nation who dont have it. But all the others do. In Europe, in Japan, in South Korea, you name it. And US population alone is a midget compared to China or India.
    1
  241. @Gary-by3vz Well, if the sub is moving under the thermocline its pretty much invisible on thermal, and unhearable on passive.
    1
  242. They throw out sonar buoys in numbers from helis, and hope those will catch the sub. Age old trick
    1
  243. You still dont get it. Any plane which is actively jamming or using its radar is by definition not stealthy. No matter the shape or form it gives its location just by emitting high frequency radio waves. And you cant make 100 km kills without some plane with a radar updating missile trajectory. Lets say your missile have the velocity of Mach 3, 100 km in mach 3 is approx 1.5 minutes, what do you think that the enemy fighter just sits where he is waiting for the incoming missile? He will just fly off course and the missiles own radar wont find him where he supposed to be. Missiles dont have 360 degree radar coverage and cant track a target that far away, if the target is not in front of them when those start to seek it, those will miss. This is all plain old BS, to rip off people.
    1
  244. Cute. You know how long was a waiting list for a NASAMS battery before the war? 9 years.
    1
  245.  @st-hf2ik  If they run out of missiles, they will let them.
    1
  246.  @CjqNslXUcM  Well, I guess, if Albanians didn't like in Kosovo, then they could move to Albania...
    1
  247. ​ @bobshelton37  It doesn't matter how they call it, no nation lets spyplanes or bombers cycling 10 miles off their borders. Next time they probably will shoot down the RAF plane.
    1
  248.  @valorz6064  That would be a definitive honeypot for any wild weasel missions with emission seeking missiles.
    1
  249.  @AndrewAustinFrustrated  So lets do the math. I will use SI units here instead of imperial for convenience. Lets say you have a carrier travelling at 30 kmh thats approx 8 m/s and its 300 m long 100 m wide, thats 30.000 m2. You have a hypersonic rocket launched from 300 km, the warhead is capable to destroy anything in a 50m radius. Lets say it travels at mach 6 thats 2058m/s. The travel time is 145 second During that time the carrier makes 1000 meters. A 1000 m diameter cicle has an area of 785000 m2 that means to have a certain direct hit on a 30.000 m2 carrier you need 26 hypersonic missile. Wit lets say 10 mil each that would cost 260 mils to destroy a 12 billion worth of ship without the jets.
    1
  250.  @ethanle8847  Yep, what we understand on hypersonic weapons is a maneuverable object on all of its trajectory. If the warhead or missile flies on a ballistic trajectory, then it is not a hypersonic weapon even if it reaches hypersonic speeds.
    1
  251.  @dnguyen3941  To be honest Ukrainians even count Crimeans as their potential reserve pool which is rather a humorous assumption. 20 million is a realistic assumption regarding of the people who left to the EU and regions occupied, there was a demographically based study about that by US colonel Alex Verhikof. But 20 million would give Ukraine a 3 million active male pool, which is more than enough to continue.
    1
  252.  @zix_zix_zix  Lol, you have the right to do what you have the force to accomplish. International law is a nonexistent thing.
    1
  253. ​ @rowaystarco  If you want to glow in the darkness, yes you can try.
    1
  254. Lol since noone cares that much about the Middle East anymore, their influence on the global stage will naturally fade with time and on the local stage they are outnumber by 100 to 1. Thats about political realism.
    1
  255. As Ho Chi Minh put it, Vietnam won because they have seen the basic fact that Americans cant always remain in Vietnam, but Vietnam will always remain in Vietnam. If Israel put its bets on American and European support instead of finding a local buddy, who is invested in middle eastern affairs forever, sooner or later they will indeed lose. Thats a matter of fact, not some moralisation.  @OldManRocketLeague 
    1
  256. Yeah Americans generally win wars with good planning, not because their hardware is that much better. Thatswhy there is scepticism how the Ukrainians can utilize the same hardware.
    1
  257.  @oze1999  Ok, but you build warplanes to wage wars with them... It wasnt nice, that the US didnt dare to risk F-22's in real combat situations, because its too expensive to loose.
    1
  258.  @Bern_il_Cinq  Lol literally noone ever cared about your Monroe doctrine. Commies are operating 100 miles off of Miami since 1960 just to prove the point...
    1
  259. Because thistime around you wouldnt face the Serbs with some Dvinas from the 60's but S-300's which would blew up half of your planes from the skies even before moving into radar range.
    1
  260. ​ @smokeypuppy417  Binkov has a video about what would happen if NATO would attack those SAM sites in the Baltics. He actually finished with the conclusion, that NATO would be able to breach them, but it would lose 50-75% of their airforce in the process.
    1
  261. Erhm we already have that check Thunderf00t...
    1
  262. I guess thatswhy the US bombed Bagdad for a month before they moved in with infantry. It is pretty conventional tactics since WWI that infantry and artillery are working together, in more modern warfare they use airplanes instead of arti because it is more mobile and have greater range, but the idea behind it is the same, clear out everything before infantry moves in.
    1
  263. They already got it, but they didn't force it down for that.
    1
  264. lol quantity always wins son. Thatswhy Hitler lost WWII although Matildas Shermans and Grants were the most shtty tanks ever invented, and Tigers were the kings of the battlefield, and the ME262 was ages ahead any pathetic piston aircraft the allies put against it. But allies produced their sht in such numbers, that it didnt matter.
    1
  265.  @SylviusTheMad  They were the second biggest weapons exporters before the war, which if they increased their output means at least a few hundred T90s annually. And noone should try if their nukes are working or not. We can assume most of them would work and they have a horde of those.
    1
  266. ​ @alex1418dney  Possibly, but if they let Russians to destroy their electric grid, that means their primary radars are off, internet connections are off they have to light up the batterries and forget their drones. There are no good choices only bad and terrible choices in this case
    1
  267. Why did Americans gave the Franz Joseph land to Russia then? That was European land by far the closest to Russia. Russians are there unlawfully actually, its still European land by law.
    1
  268.  @hollyd8989  The statement was, that the Ukraine alliance is underfunded compared to Russia. Well its the other way around.
    1
  269. Lol its so naive of you to think that Hamas would exist without the exquisite support of the Israeli and US government. @shaftofwisdom 
    1
  270.  @warlock64c  Well, we all know, that the Soviets won with T-34's, not Sherman or Grant tanks, so while American aid was a nice addition, it wasnt crucial. Also Germans used their force on vacation to protect the western front. The only time, when Anglo saxons met the real german military was the battle of the Bulge.
    1
  271.  @warlock64c  Well, T-34 was indeed copied by the Germans to their Panther tank, while they called the Shermans lighers, because it was so easy for them to kill. And there is a reason why the allies waited for 1.5 years in Britain before even have a try to make D-day, because before that Germans could repel them easily. Yeah in Italy no suprise, that Italy was a second rank theater, and the bulk of the invasion happened in France, Where they had to face, mainly hitlerjugend guys, russian POW's rerecruited from concentration camps, and above aged pop with the fighting quality of a poorly trained militia, meanwhile the elite panzer troops were fighting in Russia. If Brits would be good against the real thing, they wouldnt have to swim across the channel when the germans beated the crap out of them at Dunkerque.
    1
  272.  @Mrstrangert392  Didnt they have a military prior to 2017, that you have to teach them how to fight a war?
    1
  273. ​ @Mrstrangert392  And what does training change on the fact that you dont have tanks and jets? Thats the No1 problem with western doctrine, they always think, that their allies are senseless monkeys and instead of giving them what they need to fight, they need to teach them how to do a proper pushup. They should actually consider, that while western trainers are dewillng bunkers and talking about theory, ukrainian trainers are coming from the frontline reality, so their knowledge is infinitely more relevant.
    1
  274. You just invented the cruise missile.
    1
  275. I thought US warplanes are not that crappy to not give a radar lock signal...
    1
  276. Lol NASAMS use AMRAAM, which is not an air defense missile, and even Iris T is designed from the heatseeker missiels of the Mig 29. these are not really for ground to air missiles.
    1
  277. Lets maek the raw math shall we. At the first months of war near Kiiev Russians used tank based tactical groups for high mobility, which gave Ukraine a golden opportunity to decimate these tanks because they lacked infantry support. Lets say Oryx is right, and Russians lost 1000 tanks mainly T72s, and lets say that all of the crew are dead or wounded, that would give with a standard crew a casualty around about 3000 Russians.
    1
  278.  @seijirou302  It would be more lucky if NATO would moved in in day 1 then, this whole adventure was pointless then.
    1
  279. ​ @seijirou302  Problem is, if NATO does this, they can forget Taiwan. By no way they would have enogh resources to stop the Russians in Ukraine and stop the Chinese in taiwan.
    1
  280. Well, yes, Abramses get their modernisation packages as well. But the core concept is 1980's and I dont think if they would build it today they would build it like it is. Abrams armor wins, however its engine is a real pain in the as. In the Desert storm the tank crew had to stop in every 3 hours to get the air filters out and clean it with brushes, otherwise the gasturbine would choke. @ADobbin1 
    1
  281. All religions are man made religions my friend.
    1
  282. Lol, as long as you cant rotate your laser turret with mach 6 to follow a hypersonic glider it worth sht.
    1
  283. Well, no, in Tehran, and Yalta in 1943 the whole fate of eastern europe was papered down. @louisianaman2025 
    1
  284.  @WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq  What did the Taliban wait for? US soldiers escaped Baghram base in the middle of the night without even giving a memo to the Afghan government troops. Then it took 2 weeks to evacuate the cramped Kabul airfield which was in direct artillery range of the 100 Taliban 155 mm howitzers. If they wished so, not a single westerner would have survived.
    1
  285.  @WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq  As I said 100 howitzers were stuffed in the hills near Kabul. Remanning tanks? Sending in jets? If those open fire for a 2 km long airfield. 15 min, and everyone there is tomato sauced.
    1
  286.  @swirvinbirds1971  So why dont they send in their own equipment then? Because they dont have them in numbers?
    1
  287.  @swirvinbirds1971  That still means, that Russia has surplusses which it can use in Ukraine and meanwhile defend itself, while NATO dont have it.
    1
  288.  @WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq  Because you never were there in reality. You payed for Afghan warlords for their fighters, and called them the US military and sent in a fractional force.
    1
  289.  @WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq  Yeah man, thats your propaganda. The reality is that you constantly had to ask permission from Pakistan to even reach the Taliban, the country who armed them. You did, what you did in the airport, payed them to leave you alone. And before you start the bragging about invading Pakistan, its a nuclear country, so you cant invade it without retaliation.
    1
  290.  @rayzas4885  Maybe they can buy some from Russia.
    1
  291.  @tbyte007  They have to shoot them down otherwise the drones will take them out, thhatshow it works.
    1
  292. Stealth aircrafts are not that stealthy, they have to play evasion not to be detected, but most likely either China or Russia will know that they are incoming pretty early.
    1
  293. When the current German government collapse, and anti American forces take over, we can talk about who lost the geopolitical game. That will happen in a few weeks time, their budget is totally empty, and their highcourt just dropped back their loan requests, while the nazi party takes over the regional parliaments. And we all know if Germans are turning, Europe is turning.
    1
  294. Fight for what?
    1
  295. They used them to bombard Snake Island. Don't ask why, it was a useless PR move.
    1
  296. Lol they want to steal your money and resources for free, not to build protection, are you in that too?
    1
  297. They are in a better position to defend it than when they were, when they occupied it. You know back then, they didn't have the landbridge and the canal.
    1
  298. ​ @Last555555555  Problem is Russia is controlling the sea, and Ukrainians can't do anything about it. They don't even have to use the Kerch strait to ship cargo, they can ship it up to Sevastopol.
    1
  299.  @Last555555555  They couldn't have freshwater to Crimea, because Ukrainians closed the canal, part of the causes of this war is the canal. But supplying water for 9 million residents, and supplying water to a what did Binkov say 250.000 troops is an entirely different game, they won't have problems with that. Besides their control of the sea actually means, that they are the ones, who blow up ships there not the ukrainians.
    1
  300. ​ @Last555555555  They have total control over the seas my friend, but Ukrainians could show off that they send out any vessel to the sea and it isn't blown up by the Russians. So they had a lucky shot for the Moskva, that doesn't mean, that they grew a navy. Remember the Germans did sank the Hood, and the Ark Royale, does that mean, that they won the war, or that it werent the British, who ruled the seas? They were, because they were the ones, who could use surface boats whenever they wanted, while the Germans had to hide from them.
    1