212 Comments
RemovedFeb 23, 2023·edited Feb 23, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Removed (Banned)Feb 22, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

From speaking to friends who have served in Iraq or Afghanistan (or both), I can attest to the wholesale orientation of Western forces towards a SOCOM style of operations. High tech, exceptionally well trained super soldiers supported by overwhelming signals and surveillance and airborne supremecy. I certainly don't envy a force facing against SAS/SEAL/Delta or similar on their terms

But none of that matters if you're pinned in a trench by sustained 155mm fire against an adversary with near-peer ISR and a shell lands in your lap. You're as dead as the next guy.

Expand full comment

As a young boy, we use to watch this series on Russia's Great Patriotic War. Too bad most Americans either never saw it or forgot about it's lessons.

We also tend to ignore the sacrifices of Yugoslavia and the war efforts of China and the Philippines against Imperial Japan.

As an American, I confess that we haven't had to face war on our soil since 1865 so we lose perspective of what an existential threat looks like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ibizxvxgaY&list=PLhs30iGhgICncex8qB-_Fmej-0HSwy4fH

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

Really brilliant piece! Who else is producing this quality of analysis? Also, the quality of your writing is way over the top. Many thanks!

Expand full comment

A simply superb analysis. I stand, or rather huddle over my computer in awe. I have written article which allude to the main ideas in your article but never in such detail, nor so comprehensively. Well done. Of particular interest to me was the historical context you elaborated on. This has been mentioned by many others (including Putin himself) but never with such clarity. Russia is pragmatic because it must be. For, war is existential. For Americans, quite the opposite as I emphasize in my own articles. The key factor is, as you say, history -- which is also the key to Russia's determination to fully demilitarize and denazifiy -- effectively neuter -- Western "Ukraine". I put "Ukraine" in quotation marks because I am not sure what to call this state, which has little historic basis for its existence or legitimacy. Putin does not want to occupy the area west of the Dniepr, but he will surely welcome regions that want to join Russia. "Denazification" -- ie. tribunals and trials -- will drive those supporting the current regime to flee. Russia has a lot more to offer than the West which only seeks to exploit the region. So, yeah, you might see a rather smallerl Western "Ukraine" in the end, landlocked and neutral and dependent on the rest of Novorossiya.

As for military technologies, the Russians don't have money to waste. Nor do they treat weapons as consumer items as I suggest here: https://julianmacfarlane.substack.com/p/much-ado-about-nothing-western-wunderwaffen.

I was particularly impressed by your analysis of Western misunderstanding of Russian concern for the safety of its troops, which obviously influences a.) strategy in the Ukraine b.) design of weapons.

A good example is the Abrams. To big, too heavy to cross a bridge in Ukraine. Needs jet fuel . Breaks down every 100 km. Too expensive to use. Ditto the F35-- still not really fit for combat. Again too expensive to use; too expensive to lose. l And "stealthy:' only under the very best circumstances. The Su47 does "stealth" a lot better -- assuming that no matter what an aircraft is detectable as the Serbs proved shooting down an F117.

I am working through your articles. Some are long and I need to read them a couple of times to digest, with my weak little brain.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

The best one yet as far as I'm concerned, but then again, these more 'philosophical' oriented pieces are right up my alley. I'm also impressed with the speed with which you keep producing these pieces. What's your secret? ;-)

Expand full comment

Russian take:

Russia designs weapons to win battles.

The US & west design weapons to enrich the elite.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

I claim no military expertise but in WWII the shells from the German Panzers were bouncing off the Russian tanks so the Germans had to improvise and use the 88 AA guns to knock out the Russians. By the end of the war the Russian Joseph Stalin tank was more than a match for the German King Tiger Panzers which the Germans didn't have many of anyway. The famous British Spitfire was using 303 WWI ammunition with no cannon and no inverted fuel oil systems. On the other hand, the German fighter pilots were so much better than any of the "allies" that a 100 kill pilot wasn't rare. The blonde Knight had over 350 Russian kills and Rudel the Stuka pilot had hundreds of Russian tanks to his credit. As an old retired construction Electrician I love the capital equipment that came later in my career but somehow every Job took longer and little seemed to go smoothly for some reason. The latest greatest US F22, too expensive even for amerika has a service ceiling of only 50,000' and lacks vectored thrust for supermaneurability and F35 is a hyper complicated turkey that has so many flaws the US is keeping the 40 year old F16 design which will go well with the 70 year old B52. We won't go into amerikan infrastructure and homelessness and drugs and obesity and and. The European economies combined with the Russian federation was something that amerika couldn't tolerate so the biggest loser of the war is and will continue to be Europeans. Russia has been forced to go East and the ROTW May finally be free of the western bankster exploiter Rentier extraction classes. I won't see but I'm hopeful as long as the western ruling classes don't blow up the world.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

I'm something of a junkie for Napoleonic history, and would encourage anyone who mocks Russian fighting capability and spirit to read a good account of the battles of Eylau and Borodino. The Russian infantry was arguably the most tenacious of the entire period - Bonaparte himself could not consistently master them, as was the case with the Austrians and Prussians. Anyway, great stuff, Simplicius.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

In The Arms of Krupp, William Manchester documents how the Tiger and Panther tanks were 'junked up' by Krupp with complex and useless parts and systems. So as to increase the value and profit to the company. So, this made the tanks expensive, took a long time to manufacture, made for big parts and supply problems in the field, required a large number of trained personnel to service. As a result, the things broke down often and could not be serviced back into battle use.

I start thinking of the F-35. When push comes to shove the best thing would be they never get off the ground. Or break down enroute. War is a racket. U.S. manufacturers make crapola to lay in the loot. Not to prevail in combat.

Expand full comment

You are a treasure of real world, easy to understand analysis.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

Such an interesting article, and thanks for the historical perspective. I knew very little about Russia before February last year, but my respect for that country for president Putin and the Russian military is now huge. The West is collapsing for sure in every way; my fear now is that the current situation will be the excuse given for Eu re-armament, an arms race and even a perpetual war scenario between the Eu state and Russia. Thanks again STT for such an informative article and blog.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

Amazing write up Simplicius. One additional thing I may add is the US likes to prepare the battlefield for its toys. In 1991 Iraq war an intense stealth and standard air campaign to eliminate air defense and aircraft ensued for many days before even armor stepped into the field. And American armor cannot operate without air support and all these systems are interdependent. Russians don’t always have the luxury of preparing the battlefield but now days with satellites you can see group mass formations. 1991 gulf war and 2003 wars in Iraq/Afghanistan type groupings can be seen by near peer and appropriate counters can be done. While the US is lauded as a logistics king and it certainly is; large ships traveling across the Atlantic are east targets. This was the concern about the GIUK Gap.

Expand full comment
Feb 22, 2023Liked by Simplicius

Brilliant article once again. There has always been a complete lack of understanding and ignorance of Russia, be it militarily, economically, philosophically. The entire west believes nothing but myths of its own superiority to not only Russia, but the rest of the world.

This dismissal of reality has now come back to bite us, or more like eat us. The beauty of Russian literature was always to me the necessity of suffering in one's life, as opposed to western literature which is utopian and therefore unrealistic and childish.

Your highlighting of how practical and deadly Russian weapons and tactics are, sheds new light on how disastrously we in the west have been brought up. Another example of western unreality is trying to integrate native populations with massive levels of immigrants. Another is encouraging our children to change their sex, as if this is physically possible!!

The end is nigh for us poor fools in the west. We've only ourselves to blame too.

Expand full comment