I for once was totally predicting that outcome regarding Dumpf .
He has become Mussolini to Putler. Lets just hope he wont try to invade Canada to show how tough he is... And see repeat of Greece 1940. Or Canada 1812...
Though, if he ordered US generals to invade Canada, there is more than slight probability of first successful coup in US history (January 6th, like most thing Dumpf topuched, was utter fail)
The collapse of peace plan was also totally predictable, like 99 peace plans before.
Realism says: peace can be between 2 balanced opponents, or between friends (all the Belgium-Netherlands wars that not happened) (hence, why Israel stopped fighting Egypt after 1973). And Hamas, and whatever other Palestinian organisations there are, just has no firepower to take on Israel. And if not gor Netanyahu sabotaging the border defences with Gaza before Second Yom Kippur War, all the October 7th achievments would be a load of Hamas martyrs.
Germany still has guilt complex towards Israel, and so does most of EU. Dont expect of them anything more than strongly worded letters like recognizing Palestinian state.
Trade embargo like with Russia would be, "antisemitic"
Actually using force to help Palestinians , forget it.
Putin is unconcerned with economy, and he has talked hismelf into believing he is winning.
So I dont expect him to quit anytime soon.
My only hope is someone wioth MANPADS at Budapest airport if he goes with the visit...
Trump as iL Duce [should be iL Douche (bag) ] invading Canada? I am counting on Trump as the TACO President in reality. Yes, he still is a disaster for the country, the rules-based international order, the Western Alliance .... Of course Europe has their problematical leaders too, but the Orange Hair fiasco surely knows how to garner the publicity.
"Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" ... "A republic, madam, if you can keep it."
--Benjamin Franklin replying to Elizabeth Willing Powel [1787]
Republic refers to the form of governmental structure, whether or not truly representative in the democratic sense. In the early part of the American experiment, the House of Representatives was elected popularly. Populace in this case meant free white males of property (i.e., ownership of more than a noodle-parlor stand). Not truly democratic yet, 'eh? The Senators were elected by state legislatures until the 17th Amendment (1913).
I am not saying that this will happen eventually, but since Trump 2.0 perhaps we are experiencing a monarchy or empire in the making. On second thought, at least since the end of WWII, the United States has acted seemingly more like an Empire than a Republic with a change in Emperor every 4 to 8 years.
No, Trump won't be king, but I perceive that the office of President will continue to be very powerful, too powerful. The historian, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., coined the term, "Imperial Presidency" in the early 1970s to emphasize that the Office of the President of the U.S. had grown too powerful ,beyond historic Constitutional limits, and especially wrt war-making powers (without an official Constitutionally mandated Declaration of War by the Congress). Also the phrase suggested that the President was becoming increasingly unaccountable to the other two branches of government.
Trump as king surely would fall far short of Plato's Republic which is a state headed by a Philosopher-King (Trump would be a Moron-King) guided by wisdom rather than personal gain. Personal gain?? Hah! This is the essence of Trumpismo! This means that he doesn't give a s*** about the U.S. or about the World. "Where is my f***ing Nobel Peace Prize?" **LOL**
If the U.S. ever would throw away its Republic for a King then we would need a modern day Pericles*** as a Philosopher King, but without an early death due to a plague (e.g., Covid-19). Unfortunately, IMHO there have been very few, too few Kings throughout human history who have lived up to the term, Philosopher King. Give me a "re Publica" or at least a poor facsimile of same in an American Republic, that is if we could get back our Republic.
***Yes, I know that Pericles was a leader of a Democracy, not a Republic as understood either by Plato, or the Romans, or Benjamin Franklin (and his fellow Founding Fathers).
Another righteous rant. Given that Israel's public diplomacy now rests on the single plank of convincing the devastatingly thick populist right in the West that it is the new vanguard in the war against Islam, it's amazing how close they are coming to openly disclosing their "relationship" with ISIS.
Ah yes... in this regards: Israel first claimed - and all of the Western media promptly reported that claim - that it was a 'Hamas that popped up from tunnels to attack by anti-tank guided missile' that violated the ceasefire.
'Therefore', Israel 'bombed' again, massacring civilians... which were then conveniently designated 'terror infrastructure', by Israel and by the Western media...
Then it turned out that it was an Israeli bulldozer, operated by one of peaceful settler terrorists, that run over a mine and exploded...
...'but', in the meantime Netanyahu imposed a new blockade of all aid from entering Gaza.
It was only once the Dumpf admin called him to say they know exactly what has happened that the Netanyahu stopped and announced he would re-open the crossings...
That trump even did this is amazing in that everything Israel does is A okay with the USA. Reason? There’s too much Arab money involved with Trump to let Bibi screw this up.
> If you have doubts about this, go and check what’s left of Ukraine anywhere east and south of the current frontline, and what’s left of its power-supply network. Check how many homes are still intact and where. How many businesses. What’s the status of the local electricity- and water supply. The sewage system. How many of fields are infested by unexploded ordnance and mines…
- Any place away from the frontline is OK. Housing is intact and infrastructure works. Ukraine is a large country, much larger than the 40 km range of Russian mortars, while they still don't have enough missiles to demolish housing built for a 50M country.
The businesses is another story causes by literally the lack of manpower - as men are being mobilized to the army, the businesses cannot employ them.
Because they make much more mistake as UA, more lying and many attacks are just to do them, result is not so important , except planes which are only used for glide bombs, they have worse weapons, less drones and defending is generaly more easy as attack.
Russia CAN and WILL win, however, the thing is that it never really enjoyed big advantage in manpower, actually up until Autumn of 2023. Ukraine had more soldiers and since then the advantage had slowly but surely shifted in favor of Russia.
The Ukrainians are able to resist relatively successfully (for now) only thanks to drones, and unprecedented Western support of course.
However, make no mistake, sooner or later Ukraine will run out of manpower (the only question is whether or not Russia will be forced to conduct another mobilization before there is no one left to defend Ukraine) and unlike what we`re seeing north of Pokrovsk Russia will be able to exploit the breakthrough next time...
However, I doubt NATO would allow Russia to take whole Ukraine, it invested so much to just let Russia take a walk to Polish border...
I don't know future, but such comment i am reading since war starts, RU will win in 3 days, 3 months, 6 months, or just it will win, because RU always win all wars. But in past RU lost 1WW, cold war, Afganistan, Japan in 1905 and many others. If soviet union was not able to conquere Afganistan, how can you be so sure Russia which is half of CCCP will win over UA which is 2 times bigger than Afganistan and with much more support ? Do you know how ended CCCP and economy was suported from all east europe, but it doesn't help and there was no attack on russia teritory Afgan war. Now you have support just from Belarus and not sure if it is for free or not.
Russia can win and also can loose, as it looses or wins in the past. I don't know future. I hope russia will stop the war as soon as possible and stay in the borders from 2014. RU is the biggest country in the world but still wants to have more teritory. Nothing changed from 18-19 century.
Yes , USA also makes lot of mistakes, but when USA changed last time borders? and EU we can live 27 countries inseide without fight.
Unlike Russia, the USA are bullying countries ALL OVER THE WORLD to bring "democracy, freedom" and what not...
How many bases worldwide are owned by US/NATO and how much by Russia?
Russia is fighting neighbouring countries which are used as proxies by USA and England against it, simple as that.
And when Russia is forced to react, then everyone cries and label it as some sort of "terrorist state"...
Now, do I like the fact that Russia is unable to prevent these countries from turning up against them, yes absolutely.
Russia is far from perfect, but all the evil of this world comes from the British in the first place (throughout history) and than US since WW2... God knows how many people have they have killed...
Regarding EU - Europeans are a bunch of hypocrites, pussies and all the worst scum of the earth responsible for suffering of many nations.. so I don’t wanna waste my time on someone who does only what he is told by their masters - the USA.
Russia has better and more planes, which make some problems, has had much more munition and in 2023 used lot of mines to stop UA. and has more soldiers for meat attacks.
Can you compare western and russia artilery? distance precision.
or what is better bradley or BMP3?
At the begininng UA has to low number of western weapons and munition, now it is a better at least by artilery( also thanks to bohdana). And also by planes is UA now better than before. RU has and use more soldiers for attacks and is slowly running out of tanks or BMP.
I`m no expert in artillery systems, however I do know that Russia always relied on artillery and it is known for that since at least WW2, so just this fact tells us that they invested a lot and can’t be bad at it...
No point in comparing though because each has his own philosophy, Russia always payed attention to produce relatively cheap, easy to use/produce military equipment of good enough quality (sometimes it’s more than that, sometimes it’s worse...) the question never really was the quality of hardware but rather how it’s used (this is where things get tricky for Russia, at least it was in 2022. and maybe 2023. but since then they are learning, improving and adapting).
Bradley is a great IFV and has definitely proven it’s worth (with a little luck I’d say) and I would always rather be in one of these than a Russian BMP (at least the older ones, 1 and 2), but again, it just has to with what one side finds important - the US makes heavy, well protected stuff with powerful guns, Russia on the other hand makes lighter (not always necessarily) and therefore agile, easy to maintain vehicles, compatible with their terrain...
Again, it just depends on how you use them...
Russia is not running out of tanks, they are used in different role now (more like artillery) and they are probably being stored (at least the best ones like the T-90M, which we don’t see a lot these days do we...?) in case of larger war with nato... Also how come they are low on tanks when their factories are producing them at a rapid pace 24/7 in three shifts?
As I said, the Russians have learned the hard way NOT to gather them in one tiny space, now they disperse them, fire a couple of rounds like a classic artillery gun and that’s it.
You don;t need to be an expert to open an WIKi and compare range. Diffrence 5-10km are in time of drones very important. Another question is accuracy there russia is againg worst and that means you need to transport lot more munition to front and because of range quite near so it can be destroyed by drones. Yes 30 years ago, range and accuracy was not so important as now because of drones. Most of russia artilery is 40 years old.
The biggest number about tanks from pesimist is 200 tanks per year, optimis are saying that's just modernizatopm of old tanks. But if it is 0, 200 or 400 it is not enought, looses are much bigger, but tanks are less important now.
You are delusional if you think that Russian artillery these days is inaccurate... with drones hovering over enemy positions both sides are able to achieve precise hits with a second or third shot... Especially when you consider the experience that the artillery crews have after 3 and half years of war.
Oh Russia uses 40 year old artillery pieces, while Ukraine is using what?
Man you really need to start thinking; if Russia uses bad tactics, worse weapons, WHY don’t we see Ukrainian army pushing them out???
And if you say that tanks are less important now (I agree), why did you brought up this topic how Russia is running out of them?
I would like you to explain this phenomenon where Ukrainians are standing better then ever before yet they are unable to stop the Russians and regain the initiative since the summer of 2023. (I won’t count the Kursk intrusion as there was no organized Russian resistance there)
When was the last time Ukraine achieved any success on the battlefield other than recapturing few villages which eventually end up in Russia’s hands anyway?
The Russians are winning but this is a war of attrition where the front line is not moving much.
Both sides are rather balanced. They spend 80-100 billion $ per year on war and keep 600-800k soldiers mobilized.
The Ukrainians have lost US suport this year and also strategic inițiative. They have not launched a counteroffensive like in previous years. They should now preserve their manpower and evacuate cauldrons (Kupiansk, Pokrovsk).
I liked the sarcasm - you are ranting all the time, while we - the readers - are just trying to inform ourselves. As if there are no other substack or twitter sources.
Anyway, I think Ukraine should try again to tackle or at least slow down the ever growing thread of KABs. It’s been some time since the last strikes on airfields.
Thank you for the update. You asked: «What’s wrong with people thinking that way? What’s wrong with all the mainstream-media representatives supporting such hysteria? Are they getting up every morning and then beating their foreheads against the nearest wall - for fun?» At least one answer is laziness. They don’t feel they have the time and the need to investigate thoroughly themselves. They are used to variants of copy paste from each other (or someone above them in the pecking order) about any subject. If they are good they look for two main stream sources, which will say the same thing. (Regarding the sensationalism they need it to sell. Simple as that. )There is of course a question of «the original source», who told them that Tomahawk was a war winning weapon? And who told that Ukraine could then target goals a long distance from Ukraine… well technically true, but they are already doing… never mind. If a story that fits a world view the journalists like can be presented they present it. Especially if they don’t have to work.
I don't understand after all of the documented lies and bullshit by Trump, that the media continues to report what he says uncritically. They should always include a disclaimer that President Trump's promises and statements of fact have been found on many occasions to be unreliable.
Reporting Trump's big mouth uncritically--it's all due to advertising. The televised and print MSM rely on what is known in the online internet community as click bait.
Thank you for this information: «These offensive operations have resulted in fewer casualties for the 95th than when they manned their defensive positions. One reason is because they move fairly often, making it difficult to track their location. This may be harder to do in the winter months and there is less foliage.» This is very interesting. Because as far as I understand it a lot of Russian offensive operations are done this way, but with no training. And more loss. So the front is extremely fluid, offensives conducted at very low scale, but still takes place. But if Ukraine can do this after training, well get trained as soon as possible.
A lot of Russians have moved without being seen for sizeable distances. A month ago, some Russians took four days to cover 3 km. If you're ever spotted, it's hard to regain concealment. This kind of movement will be harder for both sides in winter.
> That’s the same like when honourable, highly authoritative ‘journalists’ and ‘experts’ are reporting about ‘Israel bombing the Gaza Strip (yet again), because of Hamas’ violation of ceasefire’, and about ‘Hamas being late to return bodies of hostages’… where Hamas was actually fighting Israel-supported ISIS-gangs that are attacking and robbing civilians, and unable to excavate bodies without fist receiving necessary excavators and fuel for them..
It's insane that anyone would give any credence to the idea that returning one wrong body or taking longer than a few days to return other bodies would be any justification for breaking the ceasefire.
Norms, rules, and laws don't apply to Trump and Netanyahu. They only apply to the rest of us.
I was gratified to read this sentence in The Guardian online. It's such a small thing. Wish journalists would report more clearly and critically like this on a regular basis.
> The US president has repeatedly appeared to be readily manipulated by Putin.
To be clear, I was floored when I read this. I struggle to think of the last time I have encountered such a great example of journalism as it should be practiced.
The media has reported that the Russians are expanding the Engels-2 strategic airbase, 700 km from the Ukrainian border. Apparently, the Russians no longer consider Ukrainian missiles and drones a threat to their aviation – there's no mention of constructing bunkers, hangars, or other shelters.
Big thank you to Tom for those small historical details, which I did know, but which should be common knowledge. By the way also England suffers from some german relics freom WW II, although in much smaller numbers (Hint: Butterfly bombs, kudos to Mark Felton)
For Trump the Tomahawks are the perfecting bargaining chip, Ukraine wants them and Russia does not want them to have them. Putin will string Trump along for awhile, delaying the transfer as long as he can without having to give up anything.
A short sentence that was overwhelmed by the more pressing matters:
"Replacements arrive from training centers better prepared than they were before".
These are Incredibly good news, this was (maybe still is) one of the biggest problems the Ukraine army faced, and one of the (relatively speaking) easiest to solve (compared to insurmountable problems like smaller population, no long range ballistic missiles etc.).
I for once was totally predicting that outcome regarding Dumpf .
He has become Mussolini to Putler. Lets just hope he wont try to invade Canada to show how tough he is... And see repeat of Greece 1940. Or Canada 1812...
Though, if he ordered US generals to invade Canada, there is more than slight probability of first successful coup in US history (January 6th, like most thing Dumpf topuched, was utter fail)
The collapse of peace plan was also totally predictable, like 99 peace plans before.
Realism says: peace can be between 2 balanced opponents, or between friends (all the Belgium-Netherlands wars that not happened) (hence, why Israel stopped fighting Egypt after 1973). And Hamas, and whatever other Palestinian organisations there are, just has no firepower to take on Israel. And if not gor Netanyahu sabotaging the border defences with Gaza before Second Yom Kippur War, all the October 7th achievments would be a load of Hamas martyrs.
Germany still has guilt complex towards Israel, and so does most of EU. Dont expect of them anything more than strongly worded letters like recognizing Palestinian state.
Trade embargo like with Russia would be, "antisemitic"
Actually using force to help Palestinians , forget it.
Putin is unconcerned with economy, and he has talked hismelf into believing he is winning.
So I dont expect him to quit anytime soon.
My only hope is someone wioth MANPADS at Budapest airport if he goes with the visit...
Trump as iL Duce [should be iL Douche (bag) ] invading Canada? I am counting on Trump as the TACO President in reality. Yes, he still is a disaster for the country, the rules-based international order, the Western Alliance .... Of course Europe has their problematical leaders too, but the Orange Hair fiasco surely knows how to garner the publicity.
"Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" ... "A republic, madam, if you can keep it."
--Benjamin Franklin replying to Elizabeth Willing Powel [1787]
Important distinction - we have a Republic with democratically elected representatives. Republic is a very broad term.
Republic refers to the form of governmental structure, whether or not truly representative in the democratic sense. In the early part of the American experiment, the House of Representatives was elected popularly. Populace in this case meant free white males of property (i.e., ownership of more than a noodle-parlor stand). Not truly democratic yet, 'eh? The Senators were elected by state legislatures until the 17th Amendment (1913).
I am not saying that this will happen eventually, but since Trump 2.0 perhaps we are experiencing a monarchy or empire in the making. On second thought, at least since the end of WWII, the United States has acted seemingly more like an Empire than a Republic with a change in Emperor every 4 to 8 years.
Trump will be never a king except in a madhouse.
He could aim at some form of dictatorship but IMHO he would fail. But he has a growing chance to not being the president for the whole 4 years.
By the way republic comes from Latin "res publica" which one could translate with public affair (i.e. it is a matter of/for every citizen).
No, Trump won't be king, but I perceive that the office of President will continue to be very powerful, too powerful. The historian, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., coined the term, "Imperial Presidency" in the early 1970s to emphasize that the Office of the President of the U.S. had grown too powerful ,beyond historic Constitutional limits, and especially wrt war-making powers (without an official Constitutionally mandated Declaration of War by the Congress). Also the phrase suggested that the President was becoming increasingly unaccountable to the other two branches of government.
Trump as king surely would fall far short of Plato's Republic which is a state headed by a Philosopher-King (Trump would be a Moron-King) guided by wisdom rather than personal gain. Personal gain?? Hah! This is the essence of Trumpismo! This means that he doesn't give a s*** about the U.S. or about the World. "Where is my f***ing Nobel Peace Prize?" **LOL**
If the U.S. ever would throw away its Republic for a King then we would need a modern day Pericles*** as a Philosopher King, but without an early death due to a plague (e.g., Covid-19). Unfortunately, IMHO there have been very few, too few Kings throughout human history who have lived up to the term, Philosopher King. Give me a "re Publica" or at least a poor facsimile of same in an American Republic, that is if we could get back our Republic.
***Yes, I know that Pericles was a leader of a Democracy, not a Republic as understood either by Plato, or the Romans, or Benjamin Franklin (and his fellow Founding Fathers).
Everywhere and at any time it always depends on the quality of the acting persons.
The constitution of the USA speaks a clear language, but if the acting people don't honor it and that for decades then things can get only worse.
Exactly that led to the transformation of old Rome from a Republic to a dictatorship under Augustus with him being the culmination point.
Thanks guy, just wondering how much more of Trump, with his I love UA/I hate UA deal making, can we handle?
I really did mean both Don and Tom when I was writing the comment. Must check spelling, must check spelling.
Israel woul be significantly more powerful than Palestinians resistants + Lebanon + Syria + Iran + Yemen if the US was not backing it non-stop.
The "peace plan" was Trump saying enough for a very brief moment then loosing interest as he always does.
But the reality remains that this is 100% a US war of extermination on Palestinians and the broader Arab world.
Another righteous rant. Given that Israel's public diplomacy now rests on the single plank of convincing the devastatingly thick populist right in the West that it is the new vanguard in the war against Islam, it's amazing how close they are coming to openly disclosing their "relationship" with ISIS.
Ah yes... in this regards: Israel first claimed - and all of the Western media promptly reported that claim - that it was a 'Hamas that popped up from tunnels to attack by anti-tank guided missile' that violated the ceasefire.
'Therefore', Israel 'bombed' again, massacring civilians... which were then conveniently designated 'terror infrastructure', by Israel and by the Western media...
Then it turned out that it was an Israeli bulldozer, operated by one of peaceful settler terrorists, that run over a mine and exploded...
...'but', in the meantime Netanyahu imposed a new blockade of all aid from entering Gaza.
It was only once the Dumpf admin called him to say they know exactly what has happened that the Netanyahu stopped and announced he would re-open the crossings...
That trump even did this is amazing in that everything Israel does is A okay with the USA. Reason? There’s too much Arab money involved with Trump to let Bibi screw this up.
> If you have doubts about this, go and check what’s left of Ukraine anywhere east and south of the current frontline, and what’s left of its power-supply network. Check how many homes are still intact and where. How many businesses. What’s the status of the local electricity- and water supply. The sewage system. How many of fields are infested by unexploded ordnance and mines…
- Any place away from the frontline is OK. Housing is intact and infrastructure works. Ukraine is a large country, much larger than the 40 km range of Russian mortars, while they still don't have enough missiles to demolish housing built for a 50M country.
The businesses is another story causes by literally the lack of manpower - as men are being mobilized to the army, the businesses cannot employ them.
The lack of manpower was mentioned as a problem for scaling up the production of Flamingo missiles.
Wouldn't this suggest the employment of women in traditionally men's civilian jobs?
An other evidence that this private sector / free market mobilization is a total fiasco.
Maybe lack of specialized manpower? Like if you have stratrgical priority project, can't you find a few hundred people
> Any place away from the frontline is OK.
Tom was describing Russian occupied Ukraine.
Genuine question, why cant the Russians win even with their superiority in menpower?
Because they make much more mistake as UA, more lying and many attacks are just to do them, result is not so important , except planes which are only used for glide bombs, they have worse weapons, less drones and defending is generaly more easy as attack.
Russia CAN and WILL win, however, the thing is that it never really enjoyed big advantage in manpower, actually up until Autumn of 2023. Ukraine had more soldiers and since then the advantage had slowly but surely shifted in favor of Russia.
The Ukrainians are able to resist relatively successfully (for now) only thanks to drones, and unprecedented Western support of course.
However, make no mistake, sooner or later Ukraine will run out of manpower (the only question is whether or not Russia will be forced to conduct another mobilization before there is no one left to defend Ukraine) and unlike what we`re seeing north of Pokrovsk Russia will be able to exploit the breakthrough next time...
However, I doubt NATO would allow Russia to take whole Ukraine, it invested so much to just let Russia take a walk to Polish border...
I don't know future, but such comment i am reading since war starts, RU will win in 3 days, 3 months, 6 months, or just it will win, because RU always win all wars. But in past RU lost 1WW, cold war, Afganistan, Japan in 1905 and many others. If soviet union was not able to conquere Afganistan, how can you be so sure Russia which is half of CCCP will win over UA which is 2 times bigger than Afganistan and with much more support ? Do you know how ended CCCP and economy was suported from all east europe, but it doesn't help and there was no attack on russia teritory Afgan war. Now you have support just from Belarus and not sure if it is for free or not.
Never said Russia is impossible to win.
Russia can win and also can loose, as it looses or wins in the past. I don't know future. I hope russia will stop the war as soon as possible and stay in the borders from 2014. RU is the biggest country in the world but still wants to have more teritory. Nothing changed from 18-19 century.
Yes , USA also makes lot of mistakes, but when USA changed last time borders? and EU we can live 27 countries inseide without fight.
Unlike Russia, the USA are bullying countries ALL OVER THE WORLD to bring "democracy, freedom" and what not...
How many bases worldwide are owned by US/NATO and how much by Russia?
Russia is fighting neighbouring countries which are used as proxies by USA and England against it, simple as that.
And when Russia is forced to react, then everyone cries and label it as some sort of "terrorist state"...
Now, do I like the fact that Russia is unable to prevent these countries from turning up against them, yes absolutely.
Russia is far from perfect, but all the evil of this world comes from the British in the first place (throughout history) and than US since WW2... God knows how many people have they have killed...
Regarding EU - Europeans are a bunch of hypocrites, pussies and all the worst scum of the earth responsible for suffering of many nations.. so I don’t wanna waste my time on someone who does only what he is told by their masters - the USA.
Stop being Russophobic.
> However, make no mistake, sooner or later Ukraine will run out of manpower
Phillips O'Brien writes that manpower is not the key to winning this war.
https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/the-harping-on-ukrainian-manpower
Sorry, I don`t care what he has to say
Literally everything what you said is utmost nonsense.
Why the hell is Ukraine not taking back territories if Russia is doing everything wrong and has worse equipment?
Is Ukraine using some genius strategy that we don`t know about yet?
It would be better to keep your mouth shut sometimes.
Russia has better and more planes, which make some problems, has had much more munition and in 2023 used lot of mines to stop UA. and has more soldiers for meat attacks.
Can you compare western and russia artilery? distance precision.
or what is better bradley or BMP3?
At the begininng UA has to low number of western weapons and munition, now it is a better at least by artilery( also thanks to bohdana). And also by planes is UA now better than before. RU has and use more soldiers for attacks and is slowly running out of tanks or BMP.
"Can you compare western and Russian artillery?"
I`m no expert in artillery systems, however I do know that Russia always relied on artillery and it is known for that since at least WW2, so just this fact tells us that they invested a lot and can’t be bad at it...
No point in comparing though because each has his own philosophy, Russia always payed attention to produce relatively cheap, easy to use/produce military equipment of good enough quality (sometimes it’s more than that, sometimes it’s worse...) the question never really was the quality of hardware but rather how it’s used (this is where things get tricky for Russia, at least it was in 2022. and maybe 2023. but since then they are learning, improving and adapting).
Bradley is a great IFV and has definitely proven it’s worth (with a little luck I’d say) and I would always rather be in one of these than a Russian BMP (at least the older ones, 1 and 2), but again, it just has to with what one side finds important - the US makes heavy, well protected stuff with powerful guns, Russia on the other hand makes lighter (not always necessarily) and therefore agile, easy to maintain vehicles, compatible with their terrain...
Again, it just depends on how you use them...
Russia is not running out of tanks, they are used in different role now (more like artillery) and they are probably being stored (at least the best ones like the T-90M, which we don’t see a lot these days do we...?) in case of larger war with nato... Also how come they are low on tanks when their factories are producing them at a rapid pace 24/7 in three shifts?
As I said, the Russians have learned the hard way NOT to gather them in one tiny space, now they disperse them, fire a couple of rounds like a classic artillery gun and that’s it.
You don;t need to be an expert to open an WIKi and compare range. Diffrence 5-10km are in time of drones very important. Another question is accuracy there russia is againg worst and that means you need to transport lot more munition to front and because of range quite near so it can be destroyed by drones. Yes 30 years ago, range and accuracy was not so important as now because of drones. Most of russia artilery is 40 years old.
The biggest number about tanks from pesimist is 200 tanks per year, optimis are saying that's just modernizatopm of old tanks. But if it is 0, 200 or 400 it is not enought, looses are much bigger, but tanks are less important now.
You are delusional if you think that Russian artillery these days is inaccurate... with drones hovering over enemy positions both sides are able to achieve precise hits with a second or third shot... Especially when you consider the experience that the artillery crews have after 3 and half years of war.
Oh Russia uses 40 year old artillery pieces, while Ukraine is using what?
Man you really need to start thinking; if Russia uses bad tactics, worse weapons, WHY don’t we see Ukrainian army pushing them out???
And if you say that tanks are less important now (I agree), why did you brought up this topic how Russia is running out of them?
I would like you to explain this phenomenon where Ukrainians are standing better then ever before yet they are unable to stop the Russians and regain the initiative since the summer of 2023. (I won’t count the Kursk intrusion as there was no organized Russian resistance there)
When was the last time Ukraine achieved any success on the battlefield other than recapturing few villages which eventually end up in Russia’s hands anyway?
> Why the hell is Ukraine not taking back territories if Russia is doing everything wrong and has worse equipment?
Logical fallacy of appeal to extremes.
https://logiccheck.ai/logical-fallacy/appeal-to-extremes-how-this-fallacy-skews-our-perception/
Yeah yeah, whatever.
I'm afraid the author relies on the Ukies' resources too much
And they don't give a shit for the lives of their soldiers (part of their "Russki mir" soviet style tradition.
https://phillipspobrien.substack.com/p/the-harping-on-ukrainian-manpower
The Russians are winning but this is a war of attrition where the front line is not moving much.
Both sides are rather balanced. They spend 80-100 billion $ per year on war and keep 600-800k soldiers mobilized.
The Ukrainians have lost US suport this year and also strategic inițiative. They have not launched a counteroffensive like in previous years. They should now preserve their manpower and evacuate cauldrons (Kupiansk, Pokrovsk).
I wake up, my head in a fog, looking at the ceiling. Then Tom comes in banging on our beds "Fantasy time is over!!!" ;)
Thank you, both of you.
Thanks Tom & Don!
I liked the sarcasm - you are ranting all the time, while we - the readers - are just trying to inform ourselves. As if there are no other substack or twitter sources.
Anyway, I think Ukraine should try again to tackle or at least slow down the ever growing thread of KABs. It’s been some time since the last strikes on airfields.
Thank you for the update. You asked: «What’s wrong with people thinking that way? What’s wrong with all the mainstream-media representatives supporting such hysteria? Are they getting up every morning and then beating their foreheads against the nearest wall - for fun?» At least one answer is laziness. They don’t feel they have the time and the need to investigate thoroughly themselves. They are used to variants of copy paste from each other (or someone above them in the pecking order) about any subject. If they are good they look for two main stream sources, which will say the same thing. (Regarding the sensationalism they need it to sell. Simple as that. )There is of course a question of «the original source», who told them that Tomahawk was a war winning weapon? And who told that Ukraine could then target goals a long distance from Ukraine… well technically true, but they are already doing… never mind. If a story that fits a world view the journalists like can be presented they present it. Especially if they don’t have to work.
I don't understand after all of the documented lies and bullshit by Trump, that the media continues to report what he says uncritically. They should always include a disclaimer that President Trump's promises and statements of fact have been found on many occasions to be unreliable.
Documented lies and misstatements:
https://projects.thestar.com/donald-trump-fact-check/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/
These projects failed to gain traction, and both papers ultimately gave up on it.
Oh the orange idiot and his statements. Have some fun. https://t.me/pilotblog/24966
Reporting Trump's big mouth uncritically--it's all due to advertising. The televised and print MSM rely on what is known in the online internet community as click bait.
Thank you for this information: «These offensive operations have resulted in fewer casualties for the 95th than when they manned their defensive positions. One reason is because they move fairly often, making it difficult to track their location. This may be harder to do in the winter months and there is less foliage.» This is very interesting. Because as far as I understand it a lot of Russian offensive operations are done this way, but with no training. And more loss. So the front is extremely fluid, offensives conducted at very low scale, but still takes place. But if Ukraine can do this after training, well get trained as soon as possible.
A lot of Russians have moved without being seen for sizeable distances. A month ago, some Russians took four days to cover 3 km. If you're ever spotted, it's hard to regain concealment. This kind of movement will be harder for both sides in winter.
Thanks for the explanation
> That’s the same like when honourable, highly authoritative ‘journalists’ and ‘experts’ are reporting about ‘Israel bombing the Gaza Strip (yet again), because of Hamas’ violation of ceasefire’, and about ‘Hamas being late to return bodies of hostages’… where Hamas was actually fighting Israel-supported ISIS-gangs that are attacking and robbing civilians, and unable to excavate bodies without fist receiving necessary excavators and fuel for them..
It's insane that anyone would give any credence to the idea that returning one wrong body or taking longer than a few days to return other bodies would be any justification for breaking the ceasefire.
Norms, rules, and laws don't apply to Trump and Netanyahu. They only apply to the rest of us.
I was gratified to read this sentence in The Guardian online. It's such a small thing. Wish journalists would report more clearly and critically like this on a regular basis.
> The US president has repeatedly appeared to be readily manipulated by Putin.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/20/ukraine-war-briefing-energy-war-continues-with-strikes-on-russian-oil-and-gas-plants
To be clear, I was floored when I read this. I struggle to think of the last time I have encountered such a great example of journalism as it should be practiced.
> The US president has repeatedly appeared to be readily manipulated by Putin.
A polite way of saying that Putin consistently & readily keeps playing Trump for the fool that he is.
Thanks, Tom, thanks, Don.
The media has reported that the Russians are expanding the Engels-2 strategic airbase, 700 km from the Ukrainian border. Apparently, the Russians no longer consider Ukrainian missiles and drones a threat to their aviation – there's no mention of constructing bunkers, hangars, or other shelters.
https://focus.ua/voennye-novosti/729130-rossiyane-rasshiryayut-aviabazu-engels-2-dlya-massirovannyh-udarov-po-ukraine-gur
Big thank you to Tom for those small historical details, which I did know, but which should be common knowledge. By the way also England suffers from some german relics freom WW II, although in much smaller numbers (Hint: Butterfly bombs, kudos to Mark Felton)
For Trump the Tomahawks are the perfecting bargaining chip, Ukraine wants them and Russia does not want them to have them. Putin will string Trump along for awhile, delaying the transfer as long as he can without having to give up anything.
A short sentence that was overwhelmed by the more pressing matters:
"Replacements arrive from training centers better prepared than they were before".
These are Incredibly good news, this was (maybe still is) one of the biggest problems the Ukraine army faced, and one of the (relatively speaking) easiest to solve (compared to insurmountable problems like smaller population, no long range ballistic missiles etc.).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/06/02/ukraine-training-soldiers-mobilization-war/
Тhis is just one look at the quality of training in educational centers in Ukraine.
And this concerns other issues related to replenishing combat units with mobilized citizens.
https://tsn.ua/ukrayina/kudy-znykaiut-20-tysiach-mobilizovanykh-shchomisiatsia-poiasnennia-chmuta-2904314.html?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=idealmedia&utm_campaign=tsn.ua&utm_term=1302128&utm_content=11761890
Thanks Sergey.
https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/mobilizatsia-ne-vyrishue-problemu-nestachi-liudey/33568501.html
This link (there are other links inside) provides a more comprehensive description of the problems of replenishing the Ukrainian Armed Forces.