Two days ago Russia unleashed another of the war’s most withering strikes on Ukraine, which was followed up the very next day by a secondary wave to finish off whatever was hit after an obligatory BDA (Battle Damage Assessment) period.
Simplicius laid out the triple chokehold tactic used by the Russian army in the previous article. I call it spot, target, and kill or STK. This merciless tactic involves AFU defenders being surrounded by a small group of Russian troops and forced into compartmentalized static drone and artillery kill zones along the entire lines of contact. AFU forces are being systematically killed like encircled shrimp swallowed upwards by hungry whales, with nowhere to go but get eaten—the Russian predator feasts on AFU prey. Russia is exhausting its enemy to death, slowly, surely and patiently. It's a pragmatic and typical Russian way to brutally grind down the enemy at will. The last place I'd want to be is on an AFU defensive line waiting my turn to kiss my ass goodbye.
I hope Simplicius continues to update us about the theatre of war tactics being used in Ukraine. The tactics can be measured up to a time frame for things to happen. Ukraine still has over 600,000 soldiers. Since Russia lacks the manpower needed for deep penetrations behind enemy lines because it rotates troops, it chose a slower but effective STK way of exhausting the enemy. It's not all-out war, but more of a controlled demolition of enemy forces.
"Since Russia lacks the manpower needed for deep penetrations behind enemy lines because it rotates troops" - It's not a lack of manpower, but the reality of how war has changed given a) total real-time surveillance of everything that goes on anywhere near the "front," and b) the ability of modern weapons to strike precisely at anything anywhere near the front. When you mass troops and armor for "big arrow" assaults you simply create targets for modern precision weapons.
That was true for precision missiles and it's true now with many more drones in the picture. That's completely changed the way limited wars like in Ukraine are fought, and it's a change that was expected by Russian planners, who knew it would be this way after watching how warfare had evolved in the US's Iraq campaigns. Russia calls it the "surveillance fire complex," the ability to see everything, down to individual tanks, that goes on in the battlefield and to use realtime links to dispatch precision weapons onto targets. Simplicius published very good reports on that about two years ago, with excellent links to very readable Western war college analyses of the new Russian way of war.
Both sides are doing it, but Russia has gotten much better at it in the last three years while the US side still has slower kill cycle response times.
Yes, but what is true now can be history in a couple of years if not months. I am extremely happy that Russia is working in the deep area of AFU defence lines. Negating supply and reinforcements is critical to make the lines crumble or eventually break. The problem is still to solve how an advancing force of considerabIe strength can run relatively unimpeded deep into enemy territory without being annihilated. The few survivors of the enemy can still direct deadly fire from far behind and the now transparant zones need to be obscured or enemy supporting forces neutralized. I am certain we will see new tactics forming in the future where this inability to breakthrough will be overcomed. History show us that War stimulate revolutionary evolution of Warfare.
Mikey, the problem is that Russia does not have the numerical superiority for a decisive deep penetration behind enemy lines, and they appear to have a shortage of mechanized units to advance troops. That's likely why Russia resorted to the triple chokehold tactic with small advances. Enemy drones can't stop these attacks because the Russians are attacking enemy drone operator locations. So it's not enemy drones preventing the Russians from a deep penetration to win this war faster. Russia simply never planned for it. Russia was ill-prepared at the start of the conflict. Had it made the right planning from the start this conflict would be over by now.
Agree about ill-prepared SMO and lack of clear objectives.
Plan of SMO was sudden implosion of Ukraine.
Paln B of ”SMO” is now slow attrition…
…but who is getting attrited?
Then we are at a crossroad…
Both facts cant be true.
a) AFU is on the brink of destruction/rout due to shortage of men at the front
b) AFU is losing more men than Russia, 3-1 or 7-1 according to Simplicius articles.
c) Russia went from 120 000 men to 640 000 but cant still mount an offensive…
d) At some sector the advantage is huge for Russia in numbers.
I think the deep mesh of defensive points and the ISR are the main obstacle for Russian offensives. They cant concentrate any number of troops without getting Himarsed. If the take a point or part of Village their strength is enough attrited so they cant follow up with a new take-over.
Someone here called it ”rinse&repeat” and it is a overly optimistic way too see it. Instead it is a sad fact that Russia cant ”stack” a couple of triple chocolat :-) and run them for 3-4 days relentlessly, thereby creating a hole in the 10-15km defence.
lol, Mikey. Indeed, both facts can be entirely true.
a) I doubt Ukraine is on the brink of destruction. Give any one of us armchair generals 600,000 soldiers and supplies, and we'd hold out for years just like the AFUs are doing.
b and c) Let's say Russia commands a 4:1 kill ratio over AFU forces; they still can't mount a large-scale decisive battle with a one-to-one attack-to-defence troop ratio.
d) Yes, in some sectors, the Russians have huge numerical superiority, but because the overall forces are equal in size and Russia is short of mechanized troop carriers, the Russian army can't push too far ahead of itself without running the risk of being enveloped by AFU forces closing in from a distance. Russia would need an overwhelming force to break through and hold, forcing defending AFU forces on the lines of contact to surrender due to broken supply lines.
Many people here overestimate Russia's capability under the current scenario and get offended when you try to explain that the Russians are not in an all-out war situation. Russia is just strong enough for small-scale advances or triple chokeholds. lol
I will say this:
Russia had over 10 years to devise a plan to defeat Ukraine in short order. Their military became subpar and corrupt. What we see now is a Russian bear re-awakened and re-energized militarily, but due to its previous incompetence, it's going to take that much longer, costly in lives and material, to achieve their objectives. That's what we see now, but it could all have been different if we had been prepared from the outset for a nasty SMO turned into a war. Just sharing a thought here.
The primary Russian weakness was in intelligence and propaganda - had that worked reverse-Maidan could have organized with Lavrov handing out pierogis on Maidan square.
"the problem is that Russia does not have the numerical superiority for a decisive deep penetration behind enemy lines, and they appear to have a shortage of mechanized units to advance troops. "
That's sheer idiocy. I see you missed that day in third grade when the other kids learned how to understand what they read. To repeat, It's not a lack of manpower or mechanized units, but the reality of how war has changed given a) total real-time surveillance of everything that goes on anywhere near the "front," and b) the ability of modern weapons to strike precisely at anything anywhere near the front. When you mass troops and armor for "big arrow" assaults you simply create targets for modern precision weapons.
It's not necessary to mass up just like the triple chokehold. The alternative is to spread out and advance deep behind lines. Read this passage from the article you didn't read, put out by Simpliticus.
The issues for Russia of under-trained soldiers and a lack of armoured vehicles remain unsolved. Witnesses have reported the use of motorbikes and even e-scooters by Russian troops to push towards Ukrainian defensive lines.
Then read the whole article and learn. Open your narrow mind.
With current Ukrainian drone density more Russian mech assaults will result in more losses. It may that the current low-medium simmer is OK for the Russians and let most of the fighting be with indirect means.
An open question is if the Russians can create a drone defense bubble using their new interceptor drones + EW + counter drone good enough for brigade level attack
"Witnesses have reported the use of motorbikes and even e-scooters by Russian troops to push towards Ukrainian defensive lines."
That's part of the way Russia's highly trained and expert troops are re-inventing limited war given the demands of the modern surveillance-fire complex. The premium is on speed and agency pressed down to the smallest combat unit possible, down to an individual.
In the new war, there's no "front" as in earlier times but a more amorphous zone of contact. The art is using real time surveillance to identify weak points and opportunities and to then have distributed resources in real time concentrate against those points. High individual response time is critical for such operations.
The "fortified" defense zone held by Kiev's troops is remarkably diffuse. Attacks on key points don't need masses of men (often four or five are plenty) - they need speed. When Russia storms key points, the use of motorbikes allows Russian troops to move into position to strike those key points with incredible speed. They also move faster than defensive drone screens can react.
"Lack of armoured vehicles" - That's pure propaganda for morons, right up there with "Russia has run out of weapons and missiles". That you fell for it isn't a compliment to your IQ.
I am by no means a military expert, but I can read quite well.
To assume that the fact Russia uses motorbikes or scooters is a direct consequence of a lack of armoured vehicles seems like a typical example of Western MSM faulty reasoning.
A bit like Kellogg calling this a victory without a battle, while Rubio says the US has run out of Patriots to send. Interesting how one can use up a stockpile of Patriots without any battle going on.
We all know that battle tactics have changed, and I'm not referring to what Simplicius said two years ago. You deviated from the topic to superimpose your omniscience of battlefield conditions, Einstein. lol. And yes, Russia is too short of men for a deep penetration behind enemy lines because they rotate in and out based on duration contracts they signed. Russia fields about the same number of soldiers as Ukraine, which is an insufficient ratio for a deep penetration attack. In addition, Russia appears to have a shortage of personnel carriers.
Li'l Kim commented that members of his military messed up. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes. I doubt Kim would send his newest ship into a zone of friction. But what an embarrassment to have a newly built ship sink upon launch. Pure tragedy and comedy all in one, huh?
"I'm not referring to what Simplicius said two years ago." You should be, or at least reading that material. That would save you from writing the nonsense you've been spouting.
"Russia is too short of men for a deep penetration behind enemy lines because they rotate in and out based on duration contracts they signed." Total nonsense.
Russia has a 1.3 million man army that's building up to 1.5 million men. They have over 700,000 who rotate into the special op to gain real world skills at annihilating US/US vassal tactics and gear, as they've been doing.
Unlike you, Russia has the intelligence to fight the special op in a way that suits Russia, which means eradicating the Kiev junta and its goons, defeating the US and its goons, all while keeping Russian personnel losses down to a minimum and growing the Russian economy faster than any of the US's vassals.
Your senility prevents you from understanding the nuances in this conflict. You may cry when you read this, but worry not.
Russia had over 10 years to devise a plan to defeat Ukraine in short order. Their military became subpar and corrupt. What we see now is a Russian bear re-awakened and re-energized militarily, but due to its previous incompetence, it's going to take that much longer, costly in lives and material, to achieve their objectives. That's what we see now, but it could all have been different if Russia had been prepared from the outset for a nasty SMO turned into a war. Just sharing a
Russia's problem was the economy, not the military. They knew there will be a big sanctions war and a huge coordinated effort to strangle Russia in all possible non-military directions.
But, Russia was economically entangled with the west and there needed to be a divorce.
And they've done it so well, the West didn't even notice it. Effects of 17 sanction packages on Russian economy post-2022 were much smaller than (now) relatively mild post-2014 sanctions. That took a lot of effort and they succeeded.
Hard to understand why you peddle that boring shit again and again. Simplicius cited it as the general description of Russian tactics, with thorough preparation by artillery, drones, and aircraft is followed by armored attack, then fast stormtroopers (not the other way round as the british moron tries to describe, indeed grinds down Ukrainian forces.
The alleged Russian losses of 1000 soldiers per day, and 1100 MBT since start of the year are the fantasies of the Zelensky/Yermak bubble. According to Mediazona and Alex Vershinin, the personnel losses may be one third at worst, equipment losses ways below. Russia may have lost a few hundred MBT since start of the year, most of them recoverable for repair.
All ekranoplans can fly like planes (they usually had ceiling of roughly 3,000m) and most could land on land. They're just crap as planes and the land is not really flat.
Ah thank you for clearing that up. Yeah, it's obvious if Russia gathers manpower for a huge assault they will be pommeled with drones and missiles because they cannot hide. So these days huge fast conquering of others probably require willingness to use overwhelming and highly destructive weapons as nukes or similar which will wipe out far more civilians
" require willingness to use overwhelming and highly destructive weapons as nukes or similar which will wipe out far more civilians"
Yes, although conventional weapons are more than enough to lay waste to a territory if you don't care about civilians. Look at what the US did to Raqqa in a matter of days or what Israel did to Gaza City, in both cases using conventional bombs delivered by fighter bombers, not even large load-out bombers like B-52s.
The lessons, theory, and practice of the surveillance-fire complex really apply to highly limited conflicts, as is being fought in Ukraine. From the Russian side, well over half of Nazi-held Ukraine is densely populated by ethnic Russians, and Kiev is "the mother of cities" to Russians, a holy place. They are unwilling to turn it into Raqqa or Gaza, although that would be the easiest thing in the world.
If you ever need evidence that Americans are total cretins and suckers for propaganda for morons, the next time some imbecile from an Arkansas trailer park (apologies for the stereotype... somewhere in a trailer park a retired astrophysicist is rolling his or her eyes...) starts barking about "Russia has been bombing civilians in Kiev for three years," give them a picture of Raqqa, showing how the place was flattened and tens of thousands of civilians killed in a few days of bombing, and then ask them why it is all those videos shot in downtown Kiev, the background for darned near every Western propaganda for morons live "news" report, show a completely pristine and undamaged Kiev, not a broken window in sight, with Western politicos waddling around on "let's get laid by a local" tours to champagne bars and restaurants without the slightest fear. It doesn't look the least bit like Raqqa or Gaza.
Of course that imbecile from Arkansas isn't going to put his or her brain in gear and think about the obvious evidence, but hey, you just might get somebody thinking... "Yeah... how do those danged Russkies kill so many civilians in Kiev by bombing it without the place being leveled?"
There's also the notion that in a real war all the support from a Europe full of nazi-loving US stooges wouldn't be making it to Ukraine, since Russia would be eliminating airports and transport links and factories and storage yards in places like Poland, Germany, the Netherlands and so on. They also wouldn't be getting real-time battle management and target acquisition from US/NATO AWACS aircraft and US satellites. The AWACS would be gone (fat, slow, easy targets, and there's only about 11 or 12 of them) and the satellite dishes to communicate with the satellites would be holes in the ground.
There's no need to rename things according to your personal whimsy, just use the appropriate military terminology that's been in use for, lo, fucking centuries at this point.
Just like the tactic Russia is using.
ENGAGE the enemy.
FIX them in place.
DESTROY them with artillery.
It works solely because Ukraine chooses to value territory over soldiers lives.
Here's another good one, (Americans love it, but seem to have forgotten)
STRATEGICALLY Offensive, TACTICALLY Defensive.
The Russian version of which is : Create a firebag, fill it with fire.
The doctrinal term is “Find, Fix, Finish” Followed by “Exploit and Analyze.” It’s called the F3EA cycle. Russia has perfected it by incorporating ISR across all domains. That is the paradigm shift in application. The US only uses ISR in intelligence and some Maneuver warfare applications as a tool or technique, whereas the Russians use it as a systemic layer across all domains to include cyber. US SOF forces use it the same way, but not conventional forces. We would be overwhelmed by the jamming, EMP, and fiber optically controlled drone environment currently in use, and our MIC procurement process is too cumbersome to adapt quickly. We would have to adapt much quicker, but would lose thousands of troops in the interim.
Niggles, I am free to use creative language if I so choose. This is how I keep my mind sharp, simpleton. Some people follow recipes, others invent them. You say you're an occasional thinker, and it shows. lol
As for your mind sharpening exercises, they have definitely failed, perhaps you might try something like doing some research? You know, instead of recreating language like an Alzheimer patient....
There's this guy, calls himself Simplicius, has a blog you should try and read.
Simplicius has hit the big time: this sub has attracted so much attention that it's attracting disinformation specialists who toss lies and propaganda for morons into the conversation.
This sub has a variety of opinions and thoughts, unlike the unidimensional everyone must think the same way types like you. Disinformation specialists, as defined by you, John, the communist overlord. lol
The RuAF have constantly adapted their tactics to the battlefield situation throughout the entire SMO, but the strategic objective has remained the same: the destruction of the Ukrainian/NATO fighting potential (which includes fighting personnel, weapons, ammunition stockpiles, weapons industry facilities, transportation and logistics hubs, energy production and distribution infrastructure, etc).
There is no need for "deep penetrations behind enemy lines" to achieve this strategic objective, which is the reason why the RuAF have not undertaken any such "big arrow" offensives.
>Whether it’s true or not, we previously reported Germany had 400-500 total Taurus missiles, with only 250 of them functional, out of which 150 would allegedly be handed to Ukraine. Such volumes are simply barely relevant, particularly given that Russia just fired almost that many missiles in a single day at Ukraine.
We have been over this countless times.
Allowing these missiles to freely fly deep into the Russian rear means disabling Launch-on-Warning.
Because they are big enough to carry nukes, and any such attack MUST be treated as a potential nuclear attack, then immediately responded to accordingly. What has been officially claimed and what the reality is in terms of deployment are usually very different things.
If the whole of Germany is not a pile of radioactive ashes minutes after the first missiles are fired, what will follow is a ramping up of the strikes, and eventually the warheads will be swapped with nukes one day, for a decapitating first strike.
What the whole war was started to prevent in the first place, BTW. It was not to save the Russian people in Ukraine -- Putin didn't give a single f**k about those for more than two decades, it was only when the prospect of NATO missiles being situated in Ukraine became imminent that he was dragged kicking and screaming into the SMO/not-war.
Russia is losing and may lose it all with a decapitation strike. Zero SMO objectives complete. NATO right on it's border with Finland now. Entire West is gearing up for real war. If this is "winning" i'd hate to see losing. Putin's directly responsible as you note - thought he was slick with attrition war on Ukraine when it's NATO attriting Russia to such an extent it's allowing nuclear capable missiles deep inside Russia. Let's hope they give Putin a graceful out and don't go there
It cuts both ways. Now NATO is closer to the firebag that Russia loves.
Every European Dictator Wannabee has foolishly enticed themselves into believing Russia is easy prey. It is only when they are being killed, rushing back home to try to save their women and children, do these scum find Plan B. Peace.
We can't even send some artillery shells or some more Patriots to our awesome allies in Ukraine, and are begging the Russians for a 30 day pause. Is that 'gearing up'?
I've been waiting for 3 years to see our tough talk actually leading to a new arms factory, a bigger and properly equipped army or anything tangible.
With perhaps 1 or 2 exceptions I see only small, ill-equipped, inexperienced and US-dependent armies in my own and all surrounding (EU) countries.
Remember that we are being told that Russia will soon attack our own countries, and even with that narrative in play, we produce absolutely nothing of any relevance.
But yeah, we're gonna win wars against, Russia, China and Iran all at once.. 🤡🤡
Russia was ill-prepared from the start due to poor planning, incompetence and corruption, which have been addressed. Putin admitted that mistakes were made. You put your nose too far up Putin's ass to see the light Yoni. lol
Before we go off on the hollywood version of GM's apocalypse maybe we should consider:
The Taurus KEPD-350 missile is not designed to be nuclear-capable; it is primarily a conventional air-launched cruise missile intended for precision strikes against high-value targets. Its warhead is a two-stage tandem penetrator designed for deep penetration of hardened targets, not for nuclear use.
"Production lines are idle: they were last active in 2019"
"Nevertheless, analysts estimate that a new Taurus missile would take about two years to produce."
"Increasing or restarting production of a cruise missile “can’t be done overnight, with the supply chain also having to increase output or restart production of components, all of which takes time”, said Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies."
Notice the words "supply chain." How many of the components are sourced from nations not friendly to DE or nations that have banned shipment of dual uses resources????
Jesus Christ, you really believe that warhead weight is only variable required it to be nuclear tipped or not? First of all, Russia have nuclear tipped artillery shells, well well below 500 kilo "requirement" you propose.
Second, you literally have to design missile from scratch with optional requirement to carry nuclear payload, since it has whole host of very specific needs, that's what Russians do, when they design their missiles, because every shit that's get's into GRAU in Russia must be nuclear capable per MOD requirements.
What you CAN'T do, is to take random missile and make it nuclear capable without compromising this mission in every possible way.
Whether it's have space for nuclear warhead or not - it's completely irrelevant.
Let's call it "potentially nuclear capable" as there is no known rated nuke warhead for the Taurus.
It has more than enough payload to carry nuke warheads, but, most importantly - Germans originally envisioned the Taurus as a way to demonstrate NPT compliance, since joining the Storm Shadow/SCALP program ran by nuke countries and Germany using a SCALP variant would potentially give Germans a new nuke delivery system other than planes (Tornado/Typhoon/F4). That was politically (more than) inconvenient in Germany once upon a time.
Just to note: Germany originally planned to buy the Apache (not the helicopter, but the French missile which is the direct predecessor of SCALP), but the Cold War ended and Germany was supposed to become politically super-peaceful. So they chose own development over both the Apache and then SCALP.
First installed in 1985, it still exists today. The particular details of its operation and its exact threshold for activation are unknown, but it's safe to assume there have been some upgrades in the last 40 years.
Multiple tactical nuclear hits were carried out on Russian military bases already, there was no response, as there was no response to any of the ATACMS and Storm Shadow launches into Belgord, Kursk, Bryansk, Oryol, Lipetsk, Rostov and Krasnodar regions.
Conventional wisdom had it that such events would trigger it.
"Multiple tactical nuclear hits were carried out on Russian military bases"?
When ? Where? By whom?
Are you seriously telling me that multiple nuclear weapons have been detonated already in this war and the big players noticed it but just didn't mention it and everyone else on planet Earth EXCEPT YOU just didn't notice it?
I'm not going to get into the slap fight you are having with everyone else in this comment section, but I am seriously wondering if you are either a hallucinating schizoid or an agent provocateur
Lots of people noticed, you weren't paying attention, which is not my fault.
August 2024, September 2024, March 2025, Morozovsk, Toropets, Engels, etc.
And of course the big players all noticed it, it has been governing subsequent events in a major way.
This was Putin's bluff being called to the maximum extent possible under still some plausible deniability cover. And it was very sucessfully called indeed -- there was no reaction, instead Putin diligently went to "negotiations" instead of physically removing the US from Eurasia, as it was an absolute MUST to do immediately after those events.
It's on video and we have satelite footage of the aftermath, as well as on-the-ground footage for at least one of them, all of which are completely incompatible with the official version of "drone debris" setting off ammo depots (hardened ammo depot hangars separated from each other at large distances simply cannot explode into giant mushroom clouds all at once)
>Why would the Chinese (for example) keep quiet about it?
The larger question is why the Kremlin would keep quiet about it.
And the answer should be obvious -- because it had three options:
1) Acknowledge it and retaliate it for it, which means nuclear strikes on NATO with total physical elimination of the threat as the goal.
2) Acknowledge it and don't retaliate for it. Then Russia is officially finished as a great power as then many more such strikes, much more severe too, would immediately follow.
3) Pretend that it didn't happen, absorb the hit, and kick the can down the road.
Clearly, #2 is not a viable option. The correct response was #1, but was not pursued because Putin is a traitor. So that left only #3.
The Chinese are keeping quiet largely for the same reasons.
The West is keeping quiet because first, it cannot acknowledge that it started a nuclear war, and second, it does not want to force the Kremlin's hand to go for option #1. The whole point is to keep these as sneak attacks with some plausible deniability just under the thresholds. It is also why they are limited so far to military objects.
The only difference between Storm Shadow/SCALP and Taurus is that the latter has a Williams microjet engine whereas the former has a French microjet engine with less thrust.
US has to sign off because Williams is US as is Rockwell/Collins which is part of Raytheon and makes the ECM and guidance systems.
Moving them through Rszezow should be dangerous for Poland now Germany has stated the targets inside Russia
"...didn't give a f*k about Russian people in Ukraine for 2 decades..."
Are you talking about the time before the coup? Why would Putin care extra about Russians in Ukraine when they still had human rights and were treated as normal citizens?
When did the military support for the Donetsk and Luhansk forces start?
Wasn't it already in 2014?
'Not giving a f*ck' is a pretty relative term but when you give people things like a BUK-system for example, I would definitely qualify that as giving something.
There was no Kremlin-initiated support in 2014 that we are certain of.
The opposite kind of stories circulate -- local commanders of tank armies crossing the border on their own initative, some people higher up in the military sending a little bit of support and presenting the Kremlin with the finished fact, etc.
And then Kremlin still did Minsk-1 and Minsk-2, right when the AFU was about to collapse each time...
>It is feared Russia will again use the exercises to launch an invasion from Belarus into Kiev, though this is unlikely.
Extremely unlikely.
Certainly not happening with NATO having given itself permission to strike deep into the Russian rear with missiles and drones, then following up on that permission, and there being no response whatsoever.
Lukashenko is not an idiot, and he also sincerely cares about his people, unlike the traitors in the Kremlin. So he does not want to be left holding the bag, in this case opening up Belarus for 24/7 missile and drone strikes from Ukraine, the way Russia has been suffering for a year now.
Which is what will happen if Belarus is again used to attack Ukraine.
The window for that closed somewhere in early 2023. Because Putin, in his infinite wisdom, refused to mobilize for six months and wasted that crucial first year before it became a true NATO-Russia war and Russia lost its technological advantage, instead of going for the kill when there was still time for it.
I don't see that calculus changing for Belarus, unless Putin finally rolls out the big guns, unshackles the army, and shows that he is serious about winning. And even then.
What this also means is that there will be no escaping from a contested crossing of the Dnieper, even in the still very remote scenario in which Russia clears the left bank.
It’s all so tiresome….I imagine a bunch of NAFO incels all gathered around a monitor back slowly running out of of trolling options and sobbing about the glory days when they could spout all manner of bullshit and everyone would believe them….
Your forecasts have all proved wrong from the begining. Putin's long term strategy is beyond brilliant. Strange you dont concede the slightest merit to the Russian command after all they went through and even now that victory is in the air. Your job has been to put down Putin as a capable leader and I seriously doubt about your true intentions.
What have I predicted? That Russia will sink deeper and deeper in the Ukrainian quagmire unless drastic measures are taken.
What has happened?
Exactly that. The West keeps escalating, Russia is ever more afraid to escalate back. Even after it got literally nuked several times.
I have also been explaining that until the internal deep Russian conflict -- that between the elites, whose interests are fundamentally incompatible with winning the war, and the country as a whole -- is not resolved, the war will remain trending negatively.
It still has not been resolved.
Meanwhile some other people have been predicting imminent AFU collapse and major Russian offensives since late 2022.
The thing is that not has happened. The truth is exactly the opposite of what you claim. Russia has effectively decoupled from the western external and internal influence, established a solid alliance with China and Iran, despite the sanctions from hell, had economic growth. And many more amazing achievements. Nothing will make you change your rants to the facts. You must know why.
Such as turning the country into a giant version of Syria, i.e. a place anyone can bomb whenever they feel like, safe in the knowledge there will be no response?
Coincidentally, it was the same people in charge of protecting Syria too.
>In Sumy, Russian forces have begun to make serious strides
This is laughable.
They are moving at the same snail pace as elsewhere -- they took the first villages 3-4 months ago, they are still only 7-8 kilometers deep at most over a 20 km long front along a small section of the border.
This is not quite Chasov Yar-level pitiful, but not all that much better either.
Until there is a broad offensive operation along the whole border that makes gains measured in the tens of kilometers of operational depth, we cannot talk about anything "serious."
It took the Army of the Potomac 4 years to cross 100 plus miles between DC and Richmond, but...
Only crazy and ignorant folks would say that the North was not constantly winning pretty much after the first year of the Civil War or that the Northern war plan (the Anaconda Plan) was not well thought out.
I was thinking only of the cretinous charge of the light brigade really, which btw, Sir Queer Stammer seems keen on replicating in Ukraine, using the local oiks this time instead of Brits, giving encouragement via the occasional bomb from their 2 buck shop military.
Charge of the Light Brigade turned into a famous piece of literature, but if you think about it, the Charge of the Free Leopards was a much more poetry-worthy mission.
In a bad way.
(a good part of the Light Brigade at least reached their destination)
Did anyone even think seriously about launching large salvos of cruise and ballistic missiles into Russia in 2021? No.
Is this the daily reality now? Yes.
This is the net result of the SMO so far.
Plus the loss of whatever buffer there was with NATO and half a million square kilometers of core historic Russian land, loss that Putin looks supremely uninterested in reversing.
The "Nazis" you refer to were funded and controlled by a sordid collection of thieves. liars and murderers, ALL OF WHOM BUT ONE were jews. That kind of screws with your dishonest narrative, GM.
You're a foghorn blasting lies and twisted truths into the ether hoping against hope that you will be believed because of your polished delivery - not because of your reasoning, (flawed as it is.)
Even though I don't know enough about mental illness to accurately describe your condition, I still know enough about crazy people to question your motivations and frankly, your sanity.
Who but a troubled but disciplined propagandist could expend so much energy lying about almost everything?
Keep it up. You're losing your arguments even more quickly than the Liars destroying Ukraine for the Tribe are losing theirs. You are a lesson in how not to defend the indefensible.
Describing you as "Peculiar" is an understatement.
Have you ever walked 10 km in your life? Now imagine doing that with trained professionals dug into prepared positions attempting to kill you every few yards. Or constant drone cover that inhibit the use of any mobile equipment as they will be spotted by modern ISR both day and night. As is there is no comparison to Russia. As no other military can even claim to do better under similar conditions.
No other military would agree on fighting under such conditions when it can simply blockade the enemy and eliminate the supply of drones while destroying the ISR.
Both of which Putin refuses to do for the fourth year now.
Only a stupid enemy would risk expanding a conflict that they don't need to expand. So maybe you are thinking about militaries lacking strategic thinking. On that note Russia has done well, demilitarising the West without directly fighting the west. Classic Tsu Zhu or probably one of the numerous historical Russian strategists.
>demilitarising the West without directly fighting the west
Very little of what is happening in Ukraine has any relevance to a Russia-NATO war.
That war will be fought with aviation, missiles, ships, submarines and air defense.
NATO has an overwhelming advantage in the naval and air domains, Russia has better missiles and much better air defense, but that is offset by the forward deployment factor, which is also overwhelmingly in NATO's favor.
Tanks, artillery and small drones play no role here, thus their "demilitarization" is entirely irrelevant.
Russian air defense degradation, on the other hand, very much is relevant. Both through the physical destruction of assets and the mapping out of air defense positions deep inside Russia.
That the west lost a bunch of Patriots is irrelevant, they were never going to stop the Russian missile salvos into Europe anyway with what they had. Russia, in contrast, does rely on its air defense to protect it, this losing S-400s and their trained crews hurts.
Then the question is who strikes first, and here we again come back to forward deployment. There were no NATO missiles and bases in Ukraine and Finland before 2022, there are now...
What advantage does NATO have? They have a lot of manned aircraft on paper? Majority of Western aircraft have never been tested in actual combat against modern air defences. Plus what is the readiness on NATO aircraft? The US air force already testified Infront of Congress that the premier F35 has only 29% readiness which is probably a gross exaggeration. What naval advantage does NATO have, large surface fleets? NATO countries are heavily dependent on sea trade which would be decimated by Russian submarines. Most of western surface assets would be concentrated on protection of merchant shipping. That would leave the Russian navy as hunters with surface fleets under anti-ship land based umbrella of the Bastion targeting system firing modern Onicks, and Zircon plus older missiles. Bragging about platforms is meaningless if those platforms lack effective offensive capabilities. The war you fantasize about will never happen as the conflict in Ukraine, where Russia all by herself, has humiliated the combined Western alliance demonstrating their utter inability to fight one single super power. On the other hand the Yemenis have have demonstrated that NATO couldn't achieve objectives against one of the poorest countries on the planet. I guess PR marketing and narrative creation can no longer decide outcomes in conflict. Or probably they can attempt to invade Paupau new Guinea or some tiny island preferably inhabited only by penguins to demonstrate some success.
>Majority of Western aircraft have never been tested in actual combat against modern air defences.
1) Old Soviet MiG-29 and Su-27s, and now F-16s too have been flying right to the Russian border launching JDAMs and AASM Hammers into pre-war Russian territory.
S-400s have been pushed back by HIMARS strikes so they have to fire from 150 km and while they occasionally manage to scare the planes off before they launch their bombs, they rarely hit them as they are too far.
Now imagine that being hundreds of planes, not just 2-3 flying at the same time.
2) The main threat will be ALCMs, launched safely away from S-400 coverage altogether.
>F35 has only 29% readiness
29% x 1000 = 290.
Which is still about 10x as many as the total number of Russia Su-57s that Russia has produced.
>What naval advantage does NATO have, large surface fleets?
Calculate how many VLS cells just the US has. It is staggering.
>NATO countries are heavily dependent on sea trade which would be decimated by Russian submarines
Except that NATO has 4-5x as many attack subs as the Russians and has the Atlantic as its own internal lake, with a matching total superiority in ASW assets. Those Russian subs will not last long.
>On the other hand the Yemenis have have demonstrated that NATO couldn't achieve objectives against one of the poorest countries on the planet.
Of course NATO could have achieved its objectives if it truly wanted too, very easily. Was any ship sunk? No. Was Yemen bombed a lot? Yes. So Yemen hasn't shown anything because next time those bombs could be nuclear, and then the Yemeni problem is solved permanently.
The Yemenis would have demonstrated something meaningful if they managed to do proper total area denial. They didn't.
Well who could have predicted that Russia would be in such a dominant position in missiles and drones. Certainly not those who predicted Russia running out of missiles again and again over the course of the war.
Given the ruckus around Russian attacks and the silence around Ukrainian attacks I'd say the Russians are hardening their position and likely will increase the pressure substantially once Ukraine rejects their soon to be completed memorandum on finishing the war.
Yeah, it’s starting to feel like we’ve crossed some invisible line where Ukraine’s defenses aren’t just strained, they’re getting systematically outpaced. What stood out most to me wasn’t even the hardware upgrades or sheer volume of strikes, but how casually the reports describe Ukrainian units stuck for months with barely any rotation or support. That’s survival mode. And meanwhile, Russia’s not just keeping up, they’re evolving mid-fight.
Kinda wild how fast the whole drone game flipped too. Not sure how anyone can look at all this and still pretend it’s business as usual.
Any day now right? I've been hearing for 3 years Ukraine about to collapse. That Idiot Col MacGregor been saying it since 2022. Well good thing is Simp and other Z-anons will have many more years of income streams as Ukraine does not collapse and they can continue writing and youtubing their "observations".
Most people here are clueless Westerners who have no idea of the history.
UPA fought to the death all the way until the mid-1950s.
This with their Western backers being 700+ km away, and thus UPA being under total blockade, and also having no support whatsoever once you moved east of Ternopol.
For comparison, Putin has done absolutely nothing to either:
1) Blockade Ukraine
2) Stop the Banderite mental virus from infecting most of the space between Ternopol and Kharkov in the previous two decades.
So yeah, good luck waiting for them to collapse any time soon under such conditions.
There is no military solution that does not involve nuking NATO in Europe so that Ukraine can be blockaded.
I knew about it. Think they were defeated a year after Stalin's death and 8 years after Nazi benefactor Germany was. The forever insurgency to some both inside and outside Russia I never bring up becuase Russia has to win first to see it.
There has in fact been no real insurgency to speak of in Kherson. Had there been no SBU in Kiev to orchestrate those, even the car bombings that did happen would not have happened.
Kherson is used as an example as it was the least pro-Russian region that Russia captured. Nikolaev and Odessa are much more pro-Russian in comparison.
Ivano-Frankovsk and Lvov will be rough for sure. But the east and even the center should not be too hard to control.
Most importantly, is it better to fight guerillas or large NATO-standard armies?
Why would they do that, Russia doesn't seem to be having issues supporting their economy and can keep up the war for years and they are attriting NATO, not just their proxy, Ukraine?
I'm not saying it's the preferred way to go but the thing about your assertion is that all of the West/NATO doesn't have the capacity to maintain that, while Russia does.
If you want to drain an enemy of its ammo and weaponry, you don't stop it from supplying. NATO member states are already complaining about their increasingly lack of such - I wonder why that is.
Yes grr cause it seems the not war will continue for years well until a business deal can be arranged between the Russian oligarchs and the western corporations and the Trump family or some decisive action as mentioned by GM occurs.
I can imagine during WWII the same kind of troll being tried, were there an internet. Goebbels tried a bit with the V-weapons thing. He realized that overcoming the bad news from the fronts was impossible and didn't even try. Luckily, today's neocons and Ukronazi stooges are foolish enough to try to say demonstrably false things.
This has been a war of attrition since virtually the beginning. It takes a long time to destroy the enemy's force generation capability. Particularly in a proxy war like this. It's proceeding apace and it will be done when it is done. That's why all the noise about ceasefires and such. They see the endgame as clearly as I do. I was pretty certain that the front would be widened and it has been. It will be widened further before this is over.
First, materiel dominance is achieved over the enemy. Already done. Demonstrate the futility of offensive action. Already done. Eroding the enemy's forces, in progress and closer to completion than people probably imagine. Lastly, the destruction of enemy morale. This is why the propaganda war is in full swing, but Ukrainians themselves cannot be fooled. They know they are losing and this will continue to be obvious. I can't imagine them surrendering en masse but individual units? We will see more and more of that as time goes on.
The whiners are going to whine. It's all about somehow avoiding the fatal endgame for Ukraine. It is not possible. Ukraine is doomed and we all know it.
And there has been so great propaganda at that….the last one I recall being published on this SitRep was heartbreaking….it was the “then & now” short video that shows various examples of the Ukrainian populace… air tight too ,because: true!
Truth in propaganda is a key element, another Goebbels dictum. He was a pretty smart guy, despite being a Nazi. Having his diaries from much of the war is a treasure trove.
Kellogg is turning Sun Tzu upside down: Sun Tzu advised against provoking needless wars and, once at war, needless battles, paying great attention to how costly these are. But trotting things out that flatly contradict what they are saying as if they vindicate them has been something Western "leaders" have been doing for a while...
Trumps biggest mistake is having that idiot kellogg on his team, and continuing to listen to him and let him run things. He had the right instinct with Witkoff, at least the guy went to Moscow, but then was sidelined
On the drones and missiles, so, are we supposed to believe the 2024 or 2023 90% shoot down rates then? Or the 30% now? Also how effective are these hits?
Mind that the 90% shotdowns were official Ukrainian figures, often falsified when out of a 100 raid, over 50 relevant hits were not to documented, sometimes even more shootdowns claimed than UAV or missiles fired.
It may have to be done not only with propaganda, bur also increasing use of chaff and decoys during approach of the projectiles.
I've always said that the simple planform of the Geran allows for an easy ramp up to quite large serial production numbers. 100 per day is hardly a beginning. If something significantly more complex than a Geran (eg: a car) can be manufactured at a rate of one per minute, then so can a Geran.
The thought of how far *China* could ramp up production of such a drone should give US military planners serious pause for thought, number one of which should be "do not fight China".
Cars are the proper comparison indeed. The complexity is probably about the same, not lower. Yes, there are fewer parts here, but the good Gerans feature a jet engine and some non-trivial guidance systems, so it evens out.
China makes 30M cars a year, or 60 cars a minute.
Russia makes about a million cars, or 2 per minute, or 3000 a day roughly.
P.S. At some point the production of explosives becomes the limiting factor.
Good thing Russia is also ramping explosive production.
Geran is vastly *less* complex than a modern car, the jet engine is simpler than a V6 with full emissions control (never mind the air-cooled bike engine version) and the guidance system would be a trivial subset of the average car infotainment centre.
Shahed Drones Now Nearly Twice as Powerful — Russian Military Enhances Payload and Capabilities
Russian forces have significantly upgraded the combat effectiveness of their Shahed drones, according to a report by Defense Express. The drones, known in Russian service as "Geran," now carry an increased warhead payload — from 50 kg to 90 kg — making them substantially more destructive.
Russian sources had earlier reported that the "Geran" drones had been modernized with improved flight speed and altitude, enhancing their ability to bypass Ukrainian air defenses.
Trump should be calling for Ukraine's immediate surrender so that proper peace talks acknowledging the realities on the ground, can take place.
Ukraine agrees to withdraw from the four regions which we assume is still a window just about open to it, and the fighting will stop. Of course all the other conditions must be met including Zelenskiiy and his team offing it to europe and Ukraine becoming neutral and demilitarised etc, but at least this will be achieved under peaceful conditions as opposed to through military means, which is what Russia will otherwise do.
Assuming the west does not want to fight Russia directly in europe (even if it could with its own troops en masse), this is the only way forward. It also preserves the idea of Ukraine after a fashion (although why Russia would still allow this is a matter of debate within Russia whose population is adjusted to the idea of fighting this war to its ideal end).
The favoured western option however seems to be to just go on chest thumping while committing economic suicide, lobbing missiles at the RF, obliging Russia to bring its full force and form right up to existing NATO boundaries (assuming NATO survives this. Trump is already pulling his own fire power and men out of europe and out of NATO, and if the euronuts continue with their death wish, there will be no NATO for them to cower behind if they plunge their people into a hot war here.
Which of course they won't. What do you do with leaders running off at the mouth like cocaine heads? Stick those heads in the toilet pan and flush.
First, the Russians demand for Ukraine to abandon Kherson City, Zaporozhye City, and the other big cities in Donetsk would never be accepted by the Ukrainians. It's obviously there to allow the Russians to talk peace but continue the SMO to suit their needs.
Second, the situation with Europe and Russia potentially going to war shows how history rhymes again. It's the same plan used by USUK in the 1930s. The US is always going to be the winner here, although this time there is a good chance China will be the bigger winner. Thereby all the "pivot to China" rhetoric and destabilisation of West, Central and South Asia. All said there is a fair chance this spirals out of control. Too many competing interests. Welcome to the birth of multipolarity.
I am sorry I did not make myself clear. If the US withdraws all support and 'advises' Ukraine to surrender to the terms as set out, Ukraine has no choice. Of course it won't otherwise do a deal.
As to a world-wide war, this Ukraine conflict is a longstanding local conflict and will dwindle to those terms if the US gets the hell out of it.
USUK instigated the conflict and continue to support it. When Russia and the US fight it is no "local conflict". It is about the future direction of international systems. BRICS are target number one.
Somehow I doubt that. The Banderites will continue to fight and the globalist elites in Europe will continue to supply as much as they can. They don't give a damn how many Ukrainians die. It all fits into the globalist plan of population reduction.
I seriously doubt it fits into any globalist plan of population reduction, killing a million here or there has been tried by the US for decades with no noticeable 'progress', it's more about destroying Russia and getting cheap access to their resources. It's about economic success, the same way Britain did it when they contributed to the 'excess deaths' of between 100 and 165 million Indians alone during the 40 years between 1880 and 1920, than population control. They couldn't care less if there are 50 billion people, with everyone living a shit life and starving, as long as they aren't in that group.
I don't see Trump being able to stop the war, even if he wanted to, the 'deep state'/neocons or whatever you want to call it, are dead set on defeating Russia, they will not stop.
The same nasty combine that off'd JFK is responsible for the current UKE debacle. Now it becomes more and more about narrative management Here in the USA! where I wake up. No matter the vote...you always get more war. This is just another version of "Manifest Destiny". How did these Arabs end up sitting on OUR oil!? How did these awful Slavs end up sitting on this cornucopia of natural resources?! OUR natural resources...aka as money in the portfolio/bank. Mo' money...mo' money...mo' money!
.
In a rational world these western war mongers would be hanging from every tree and lamp post. Never too late to start. Bigly sad...
>It's the same plan used by USUK in the 1930s. The US is always going to be the winner here, although this time there is a good chance China will be the bigger winner
It is the same plan indeed -- instigate a major war on the continent, sweep up the pieces.
But there is a major difference -- it is working so far only because the Kremlin is inhabitted by traitors who want to be friends with the West again.
The Kremlin could have and still can at any time put an end to the game by annihilating Europe and physically eliminating the threat. At zero cost to itself, leaving the UK and the US as the losers.
It has not happened only because the interests of the Russian elites are at odds with the interests of the Russian people, and it is the former in power, not the latter
I've seen a few references to that but no details anywhere. Is it certain it was a targetted attack vs the helicopter just happening to be in the vicinity of enemy drones?
I'm sure it was legit. The RF announced it. And then there was that huge retaliation and Putin said today - no more debates - can't remember the exact quote but it was withering. And Trump says he furious with Putin and I even read there is going to be a big escalation now. In my ( not so ) humble opinion - if zelensky is now trying to assassinate Putin - then its game on for him too
A retaliation for trying to kill Putin would have been finally taking out Zelensky. Budanov and Malyuk.
That wasn't done. Not for the first time -- they have tried to kill Putin multiple times in the past, and even bragged about it.
Bombing the Antonov plant is not retaliation.
It is a scandal.
A scandal because An-196 drones have been flying deep into Russia for more than a year now and the Antonov plant was not touched all that time until now.
wow. I don't even know where to begin. Follow William Schryver on X or also his substack - but his X account is fantastic. Him and Simplicius know each other for sure. Those missiles they used to bomb last night or maybe the night before were new. And they hit really important stuff. Anyway - I can see that you and I would be talking for hours if I was to educate you on stuff you should know about if you're going to say stuff like that. Nevermind
GM—calling Putin a “traitor” causes whatever you have to say to be immediately devalued if not dismissed. Listen to the way he speaks. Read what he has to say (even in translation)—how he represents his country. Such monumental treachery CANNOT be sequestered—it would bleed through in the most telling situations. And dozens, if not hundreds would have to be party to such a conspiracy, including such highly-regarded people like Lavrov, always the smartest guy in the room.
Yes it surely does but it seems most people blithely accept it as ok even say all part of the plan nothing to worry about here move on, keep up the struggle to expose the true situation GM.
Interesting. The “retaliation” wasn’t though as the big missile and drone strikes are planned well in advance. That huge strikes’ timing was a coincidence.
Also how would NATO know in advance VVP would be flying there?
See John Helmers report though still not stating direct attack on Putins helicopter but dramatic uptick in volume of incoming on Kursk at time of Putins arrival hence supposed reason for large scale attack by RFed. Otherwise all would be as normal slowly slowly and little by little.
Western rag "authors" often like to fantasize about receiving Pulitzer prizes for their artistically 'descriptive' drivel, I mean writing.
LOL!!
That was for the task of identifying the ”source” to Budanovs henchmen.
I'm the fastest gun in the west.
and then you woke up, huh, Dicho? lol
The green of envy is not a good look. We duel at high noon.
So let's say I'm Blondie and you're Tuco.
https://youtu.be/TV-gRHoH1As?t=8613
Too bad you fire blanks.
Simplicius laid out the triple chokehold tactic used by the Russian army in the previous article. I call it spot, target, and kill or STK. This merciless tactic involves AFU defenders being surrounded by a small group of Russian troops and forced into compartmentalized static drone and artillery kill zones along the entire lines of contact. AFU forces are being systematically killed like encircled shrimp swallowed upwards by hungry whales, with nowhere to go but get eaten—the Russian predator feasts on AFU prey. Russia is exhausting its enemy to death, slowly, surely and patiently. It's a pragmatic and typical Russian way to brutally grind down the enemy at will. The last place I'd want to be is on an AFU defensive line waiting my turn to kiss my ass goodbye.
I hope Simplicius continues to update us about the theatre of war tactics being used in Ukraine. The tactics can be measured up to a time frame for things to happen. Ukraine still has over 600,000 soldiers. Since Russia lacks the manpower needed for deep penetrations behind enemy lines because it rotates troops, it chose a slower but effective STK way of exhausting the enemy. It's not all-out war, but more of a controlled demolition of enemy forces.
"Since Russia lacks the manpower needed for deep penetrations behind enemy lines because it rotates troops" - It's not a lack of manpower, but the reality of how war has changed given a) total real-time surveillance of everything that goes on anywhere near the "front," and b) the ability of modern weapons to strike precisely at anything anywhere near the front. When you mass troops and armor for "big arrow" assaults you simply create targets for modern precision weapons.
That was true for precision missiles and it's true now with many more drones in the picture. That's completely changed the way limited wars like in Ukraine are fought, and it's a change that was expected by Russian planners, who knew it would be this way after watching how warfare had evolved in the US's Iraq campaigns. Russia calls it the "surveillance fire complex," the ability to see everything, down to individual tanks, that goes on in the battlefield and to use realtime links to dispatch precision weapons onto targets. Simplicius published very good reports on that about two years ago, with excellent links to very readable Western war college analyses of the new Russian way of war.
Both sides are doing it, but Russia has gotten much better at it in the last three years while the US side still has slower kill cycle response times.
Inaccurate analogy.
IED's are poor mans artillery.
FPV drones are less poor mans artillery under regular force control.
An interesting take. Correct.
Just imagine Iraq war with hundred times more IEDs.
Yes, but what is true now can be history in a couple of years if not months. I am extremely happy that Russia is working in the deep area of AFU defence lines. Negating supply and reinforcements is critical to make the lines crumble or eventually break. The problem is still to solve how an advancing force of considerabIe strength can run relatively unimpeded deep into enemy territory without being annihilated. The few survivors of the enemy can still direct deadly fire from far behind and the now transparant zones need to be obscured or enemy supporting forces neutralized. I am certain we will see new tactics forming in the future where this inability to breakthrough will be overcomed. History show us that War stimulate revolutionary evolution of Warfare.
Mikey, the problem is that Russia does not have the numerical superiority for a decisive deep penetration behind enemy lines, and they appear to have a shortage of mechanized units to advance troops. That's likely why Russia resorted to the triple chokehold tactic with small advances. Enemy drones can't stop these attacks because the Russians are attacking enemy drone operator locations. So it's not enemy drones preventing the Russians from a deep penetration to win this war faster. Russia simply never planned for it. Russia was ill-prepared at the start of the conflict. Had it made the right planning from the start this conflict would be over by now.
Agree about ill-prepared SMO and lack of clear objectives.
Plan of SMO was sudden implosion of Ukraine.
Paln B of ”SMO” is now slow attrition…
…but who is getting attrited?
Then we are at a crossroad…
Both facts cant be true.
a) AFU is on the brink of destruction/rout due to shortage of men at the front
b) AFU is losing more men than Russia, 3-1 or 7-1 according to Simplicius articles.
c) Russia went from 120 000 men to 640 000 but cant still mount an offensive…
d) At some sector the advantage is huge for Russia in numbers.
I think the deep mesh of defensive points and the ISR are the main obstacle for Russian offensives. They cant concentrate any number of troops without getting Himarsed. If the take a point or part of Village their strength is enough attrited so they cant follow up with a new take-over.
Someone here called it ”rinse&repeat” and it is a overly optimistic way too see it. Instead it is a sad fact that Russia cant ”stack” a couple of triple chocolat :-) and run them for 3-4 days relentlessly, thereby creating a hole in the 10-15km defence.
lol, Mikey. Indeed, both facts can be entirely true.
a) I doubt Ukraine is on the brink of destruction. Give any one of us armchair generals 600,000 soldiers and supplies, and we'd hold out for years just like the AFUs are doing.
b and c) Let's say Russia commands a 4:1 kill ratio over AFU forces; they still can't mount a large-scale decisive battle with a one-to-one attack-to-defence troop ratio.
d) Yes, in some sectors, the Russians have huge numerical superiority, but because the overall forces are equal in size and Russia is short of mechanized troop carriers, the Russian army can't push too far ahead of itself without running the risk of being enveloped by AFU forces closing in from a distance. Russia would need an overwhelming force to break through and hold, forcing defending AFU forces on the lines of contact to surrender due to broken supply lines.
Many people here overestimate Russia's capability under the current scenario and get offended when you try to explain that the Russians are not in an all-out war situation. Russia is just strong enough for small-scale advances or triple chokeholds. lol
I will say this:
Russia had over 10 years to devise a plan to defeat Ukraine in short order. Their military became subpar and corrupt. What we see now is a Russian bear re-awakened and re-energized militarily, but due to its previous incompetence, it's going to take that much longer, costly in lives and material, to achieve their objectives. That's what we see now, but it could all have been different if we had been prepared from the outset for a nasty SMO turned into a war. Just sharing a thought here.
Your thinking is Gold. Nothing more to add.
The primary Russian weakness was in intelligence and propaganda - had that worked reverse-Maidan could have organized with Lavrov handing out pierogis on Maidan square.
"the problem is that Russia does not have the numerical superiority for a decisive deep penetration behind enemy lines, and they appear to have a shortage of mechanized units to advance troops. "
That's sheer idiocy. I see you missed that day in third grade when the other kids learned how to understand what they read. To repeat, It's not a lack of manpower or mechanized units, but the reality of how war has changed given a) total real-time surveillance of everything that goes on anywhere near the "front," and b) the ability of modern weapons to strike precisely at anything anywhere near the front. When you mass troops and armor for "big arrow" assaults you simply create targets for modern precision weapons.
Doh.
It's not necessary to mass up just like the triple chokehold. The alternative is to spread out and advance deep behind lines. Read this passage from the article you didn't read, put out by Simpliticus.
The issues for Russia of under-trained soldiers and a lack of armoured vehicles remain unsolved. Witnesses have reported the use of motorbikes and even e-scooters by Russian troops to push towards Ukrainian defensive lines.
Then read the whole article and learn. Open your narrow mind.
https://archive.ph/C0YJt
The British tabloid is your bible?
With current Ukrainian drone density more Russian mech assaults will result in more losses. It may that the current low-medium simmer is OK for the Russians and let most of the fighting be with indirect means.
An open question is if the Russians can create a drone defense bubble using their new interceptor drones + EW + counter drone good enough for brigade level attack
"Witnesses have reported the use of motorbikes and even e-scooters by Russian troops to push towards Ukrainian defensive lines."
That's part of the way Russia's highly trained and expert troops are re-inventing limited war given the demands of the modern surveillance-fire complex. The premium is on speed and agency pressed down to the smallest combat unit possible, down to an individual.
In the new war, there's no "front" as in earlier times but a more amorphous zone of contact. The art is using real time surveillance to identify weak points and opportunities and to then have distributed resources in real time concentrate against those points. High individual response time is critical for such operations.
The "fortified" defense zone held by Kiev's troops is remarkably diffuse. Attacks on key points don't need masses of men (often four or five are plenty) - they need speed. When Russia storms key points, the use of motorbikes allows Russian troops to move into position to strike those key points with incredible speed. They also move faster than defensive drone screens can react.
"Lack of armoured vehicles" - That's pure propaganda for morons, right up there with "Russia has run out of weapons and missiles". That you fell for it isn't a compliment to your IQ.
I am by no means a military expert, but I can read quite well.
To assume that the fact Russia uses motorbikes or scooters is a direct consequence of a lack of armoured vehicles seems like a typical example of Western MSM faulty reasoning.
A bit like Kellogg calling this a victory without a battle, while Rubio says the US has run out of Patriots to send. Interesting how one can use up a stockpile of Patriots without any battle going on.
We all know that battle tactics have changed, and I'm not referring to what Simplicius said two years ago. You deviated from the topic to superimpose your omniscience of battlefield conditions, Einstein. lol. And yes, Russia is too short of men for a deep penetration behind enemy lines because they rotate in and out based on duration contracts they signed. Russia fields about the same number of soldiers as Ukraine, which is an insufficient ratio for a deep penetration attack. In addition, Russia appears to have a shortage of personnel carriers.
Li'l Kim commented that members of his military messed up. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes. I doubt Kim would send his newest ship into a zone of friction. But what an embarrassment to have a newly built ship sink upon launch. Pure tragedy and comedy all in one, huh?
"I'm not referring to what Simplicius said two years ago." You should be, or at least reading that material. That would save you from writing the nonsense you've been spouting.
"Russia is too short of men for a deep penetration behind enemy lines because they rotate in and out based on duration contracts they signed." Total nonsense.
Russia has a 1.3 million man army that's building up to 1.5 million men. They have over 700,000 who rotate into the special op to gain real world skills at annihilating US/US vassal tactics and gear, as they've been doing.
Unlike you, Russia has the intelligence to fight the special op in a way that suits Russia, which means eradicating the Kiev junta and its goons, defeating the US and its goons, all while keeping Russian personnel losses down to a minimum and growing the Russian economy faster than any of the US's vassals.
Your senility prevents you from understanding the nuances in this conflict. You may cry when you read this, but worry not.
Russia had over 10 years to devise a plan to defeat Ukraine in short order. Their military became subpar and corrupt. What we see now is a Russian bear re-awakened and re-energized militarily, but due to its previous incompetence, it's going to take that much longer, costly in lives and material, to achieve their objectives. That's what we see now, but it could all have been different if Russia had been prepared from the outset for a nasty SMO turned into a war. Just sharing a
Russia's problem was the economy, not the military. They knew there will be a big sanctions war and a huge coordinated effort to strangle Russia in all possible non-military directions.
But, Russia was economically entangled with the west and there needed to be a divorce.
And they've done it so well, the West didn't even notice it. Effects of 17 sanction packages on Russian economy post-2022 were much smaller than (now) relatively mild post-2014 sanctions. That took a lot of effort and they succeeded.
Russia is not only about the military.
Well said. Thanks.
https://archive.ph/C0YJt
Hard to understand why you peddle that boring shit again and again. Simplicius cited it as the general description of Russian tactics, with thorough preparation by artillery, drones, and aircraft is followed by armored attack, then fast stormtroopers (not the other way round as the british moron tries to describe, indeed grinds down Ukrainian forces.
The alleged Russian losses of 1000 soldiers per day, and 1100 MBT since start of the year are the fantasies of the Zelensky/Yermak bubble. According to Mediazona and Alex Vershinin, the personnel losses may be one third at worst, equipment losses ways below. Russia may have lost a few hundred MBT since start of the year, most of them recoverable for repair.
Is it fun to write such crap?
It seems to me that ordinance like the krasnopol artillery shell would be very needy in large numbers.
Another thing I expect to see, as this winds down and there is more space for R&D is the combat ekranoplan.
With large wheels recessed in the wing pontoons they would would make insertions and extractions much quicker and possibly more safe as well.
Ekranoplan is quite a crappy idea if the sea is not calm or the terrain is not flat.
It might work relatively well as a cargo plane, but not as an amphibious troop transport replacement.
Those small(ish) ones (the A-90) turned into rescue vessels are a brilliant idea, however.
On the contrary, it’s very easy to make it land based
All ekranoplans can fly like planes (they usually had ceiling of roughly 3,000m) and most could land on land. They're just crap as planes and the land is not really flat.
The Lippish X 114 configuration is also capable of free flight, which allows it to hop over things like powerlines trees, and various other obstacles
A-90 has service ceiling of 3,000m at 140,000kg of weight.
It's a plane, after all. Just doesn't fly well in any way, shape or form.
Ah thank you for clearing that up. Yeah, it's obvious if Russia gathers manpower for a huge assault they will be pommeled with drones and missiles because they cannot hide. So these days huge fast conquering of others probably require willingness to use overwhelming and highly destructive weapons as nukes or similar which will wipe out far more civilians
" require willingness to use overwhelming and highly destructive weapons as nukes or similar which will wipe out far more civilians"
Yes, although conventional weapons are more than enough to lay waste to a territory if you don't care about civilians. Look at what the US did to Raqqa in a matter of days or what Israel did to Gaza City, in both cases using conventional bombs delivered by fighter bombers, not even large load-out bombers like B-52s.
The lessons, theory, and practice of the surveillance-fire complex really apply to highly limited conflicts, as is being fought in Ukraine. From the Russian side, well over half of Nazi-held Ukraine is densely populated by ethnic Russians, and Kiev is "the mother of cities" to Russians, a holy place. They are unwilling to turn it into Raqqa or Gaza, although that would be the easiest thing in the world.
If you ever need evidence that Americans are total cretins and suckers for propaganda for morons, the next time some imbecile from an Arkansas trailer park (apologies for the stereotype... somewhere in a trailer park a retired astrophysicist is rolling his or her eyes...) starts barking about "Russia has been bombing civilians in Kiev for three years," give them a picture of Raqqa, showing how the place was flattened and tens of thousands of civilians killed in a few days of bombing, and then ask them why it is all those videos shot in downtown Kiev, the background for darned near every Western propaganda for morons live "news" report, show a completely pristine and undamaged Kiev, not a broken window in sight, with Western politicos waddling around on "let's get laid by a local" tours to champagne bars and restaurants without the slightest fear. It doesn't look the least bit like Raqqa or Gaza.
Of course that imbecile from Arkansas isn't going to put his or her brain in gear and think about the obvious evidence, but hey, you just might get somebody thinking... "Yeah... how do those danged Russkies kill so many civilians in Kiev by bombing it without the place being leveled?"
There's also the notion that in a real war all the support from a Europe full of nazi-loving US stooges wouldn't be making it to Ukraine, since Russia would be eliminating airports and transport links and factories and storage yards in places like Poland, Germany, the Netherlands and so on. They also wouldn't be getting real-time battle management and target acquisition from US/NATO AWACS aircraft and US satellites. The AWACS would be gone (fat, slow, easy targets, and there's only about 11 or 12 of them) and the satellite dishes to communicate with the satellites would be holes in the ground.
Lord, you and GM are a pair.
"I call it spot, target, and kill or STK"
There's no need to rename things according to your personal whimsy, just use the appropriate military terminology that's been in use for, lo, fucking centuries at this point.
Just like the tactic Russia is using.
ENGAGE the enemy.
FIX them in place.
DESTROY them with artillery.
It works solely because Ukraine chooses to value territory over soldiers lives.
Here's another good one, (Americans love it, but seem to have forgotten)
STRATEGICALLY Offensive, TACTICALLY Defensive.
The Russian version of which is : Create a firebag, fill it with fire.
The doctrinal term is “Find, Fix, Finish” Followed by “Exploit and Analyze.” It’s called the F3EA cycle. Russia has perfected it by incorporating ISR across all domains. That is the paradigm shift in application. The US only uses ISR in intelligence and some Maneuver warfare applications as a tool or technique, whereas the Russians use it as a systemic layer across all domains to include cyber. US SOF forces use it the same way, but not conventional forces. We would be overwhelmed by the jamming, EMP, and fiber optically controlled drone environment currently in use, and our MIC procurement process is too cumbersome to adapt quickly. We would have to adapt much quicker, but would lose thousands of troops in the interim.
Good info here, Ronald. thanks. What does Army SOF stand for? Just curious.
Special Operations Forces
I look forward to reading your comments and getting your opinion in future articles, Ronald.
Niggles, I am free to use creative language if I so choose. This is how I keep my mind sharp, simpleton. Some people follow recipes, others invent them. You say you're an occasional thinker, and it shows. lol
At least I think, unlike you and GM.
As for your mind sharpening exercises, they have definitely failed, perhaps you might try something like doing some research? You know, instead of recreating language like an Alzheimer patient....
There's this guy, calls himself Simplicius, has a blog you should try and read.
From the beginning.
It'll help.
"Lord, you and GM are a pair."
Simplicius has hit the big time: this sub has attracted so much attention that it's attracting disinformation specialists who toss lies and propaganda for morons into the conversation.
This sub has a variety of opinions and thoughts, unlike the unidimensional everyone must think the same way types like you. Disinformation specialists, as defined by you, John, the communist overlord. lol
Not all the world thinks like you, John.
Are you really unit 8200 laborer?
https://archive.ph/C0YJt
Find, Fix & Frag work for’ya?
Urah!!
The RuAF have constantly adapted their tactics to the battlefield situation throughout the entire SMO, but the strategic objective has remained the same: the destruction of the Ukrainian/NATO fighting potential (which includes fighting personnel, weapons, ammunition stockpiles, weapons industry facilities, transportation and logistics hubs, energy production and distribution infrastructure, etc).
There is no need for "deep penetrations behind enemy lines" to achieve this strategic objective, which is the reason why the RuAF have not undertaken any such "big arrow" offensives.
>Whether it’s true or not, we previously reported Germany had 400-500 total Taurus missiles, with only 250 of them functional, out of which 150 would allegedly be handed to Ukraine. Such volumes are simply barely relevant, particularly given that Russia just fired almost that many missiles in a single day at Ukraine.
We have been over this countless times.
Allowing these missiles to freely fly deep into the Russian rear means disabling Launch-on-Warning.
Because they are big enough to carry nukes, and any such attack MUST be treated as a potential nuclear attack, then immediately responded to accordingly. What has been officially claimed and what the reality is in terms of deployment are usually very different things.
If the whole of Germany is not a pile of radioactive ashes minutes after the first missiles are fired, what will follow is a ramping up of the strikes, and eventually the warheads will be swapped with nukes one day, for a decapitating first strike.
What the whole war was started to prevent in the first place, BTW. It was not to save the Russian people in Ukraine -- Putin didn't give a single f**k about those for more than two decades, it was only when the prospect of NATO missiles being situated in Ukraine became imminent that he was dragged kicking and screaming into the SMO/not-war.
Russia is losing and may lose it all with a decapitation strike. Zero SMO objectives complete. NATO right on it's border with Finland now. Entire West is gearing up for real war. If this is "winning" i'd hate to see losing. Putin's directly responsible as you note - thought he was slick with attrition war on Ukraine when it's NATO attriting Russia to such an extent it's allowing nuclear capable missiles deep inside Russia. Let's hope they give Putin a graceful out and don't go there
Hezbollah thought they were wise and dignified with their "restraint" and "strategic patience" too.
How did it work out for them?
Against the same enemies too.
👎🤮👎🤮👎🤮👎🤮👎🤮👎🤮
It cuts both ways. Now NATO is closer to the firebag that Russia loves.
Every European Dictator Wannabee has foolishly enticed themselves into believing Russia is easy prey. It is only when they are being killed, rushing back home to try to save their women and children, do these scum find Plan B. Peace.
But always, always too late.
Handelt. Western Europe is talking about 're-arming so far. No actual re-arming is happening as yet.
'Entire West is gearing up for real war'.
We can't even send some artillery shells or some more Patriots to our awesome allies in Ukraine, and are begging the Russians for a 30 day pause. Is that 'gearing up'?
I've been waiting for 3 years to see our tough talk actually leading to a new arms factory, a bigger and properly equipped army or anything tangible.
With perhaps 1 or 2 exceptions I see only small, ill-equipped, inexperienced and US-dependent armies in my own and all surrounding (EU) countries.
Remember that we are being told that Russia will soon attack our own countries, and even with that narrative in play, we produce absolutely nothing of any relevance.
But yeah, we're gonna win wars against, Russia, China and Iran all at once.. 🤡🤡
You are occupying the comment section with your defeatisth demoralizing crap since you popped up here. Putin was right all along the way. SUCK IT UP.
Russia was ill-prepared from the start due to poor planning, incompetence and corruption, which have been addressed. Putin admitted that mistakes were made. You put your nose too far up Putin's ass to see the light Yoni. lol
Cope, sarah, cope harder
Another retard around
Before we go off on the hollywood version of GM's apocalypse maybe we should consider:
The Taurus KEPD-350 missile is not designed to be nuclear-capable; it is primarily a conventional air-launched cruise missile intended for precision strikes against high-value targets. Its warhead is a two-stage tandem penetrator designed for deep penetration of hardened targets, not for nuclear use.
Supply chains and manufacturing time:
Takeaways from: https://caliber.az/en/post/why-germany-s-taurus-europe-s-most-wanted-long-range-missile
"No missiles are in production."
"Production lines are idle: they were last active in 2019"
"Nevertheless, analysts estimate that a new Taurus missile would take about two years to produce."
"Increasing or restarting production of a cruise missile “can’t be done overnight, with the supply chain also having to increase output or restart production of components, all of which takes time”, said Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies."
Notice the words "supply chain." How many of the components are sourced from nations not friendly to DE or nations that have banned shipment of dual uses resources????
In other words GM's screed is Stiermist.
>The Taurus KEPD-350 missile is not designed to be nuclear-capable
It's a 500-kg warhead.
Of course it is nuclear-capable, the question is whether it can carry a megaton or it is merely in the hundreds of kilotons range.
LMAO
End of conversation
Grow up.
Do you have any idea how much (or rather, how little) nukes weigh?
25kg with a 0.01kiloton yield. Boring. So there. Hardly worth the repercussion of using nukes.
Jesus Christ, you really believe that warhead weight is only variable required it to be nuclear tipped or not? First of all, Russia have nuclear tipped artillery shells, well well below 500 kilo "requirement" you propose.
Second, you literally have to design missile from scratch with optional requirement to carry nuclear payload, since it has whole host of very specific needs, that's what Russians do, when they design their missiles, because every shit that's get's into GRAU in Russia must be nuclear capable per MOD requirements.
What you CAN'T do, is to take random missile and make it nuclear capable without compromising this mission in every possible way.
Whether it's have space for nuclear warhead or not - it's completely irrelevant.
Let's call it "potentially nuclear capable" as there is no known rated nuke warhead for the Taurus.
It has more than enough payload to carry nuke warheads, but, most importantly - Germans originally envisioned the Taurus as a way to demonstrate NPT compliance, since joining the Storm Shadow/SCALP program ran by nuke countries and Germany using a SCALP variant would potentially give Germans a new nuke delivery system other than planes (Tornado/Typhoon/F4). That was politically (more than) inconvenient in Germany once upon a time.
Just to note: Germany originally planned to buy the Apache (not the helicopter, but the French missile which is the direct predecessor of SCALP), but the Cold War ended and Germany was supposed to become politically super-peaceful. So they chose own development over both the Apache and then SCALP.
No "decapitating first strike" against Russia is possible, you're forgetting about Система «Периметр», "The Perimeter System" AKA "The Dead Hand".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Hand
First installed in 1985, it still exists today. The particular details of its operation and its exact threshold for activation are unknown, but it's safe to assume there have been some upgrades in the last 40 years.
https://ria.ru/20170821/1500527559.html
Multiple tactical nuclear hits were carried out on Russian military bases already, there was no response, as there was no response to any of the ATACMS and Storm Shadow launches into Belgord, Kursk, Bryansk, Oryol, Lipetsk, Rostov and Krasnodar regions.
Conventional wisdom had it that such events would trigger it.
So has it been taken offline or what?
"Multiple tactical nuclear hits were carried out on Russian military bases"?
When ? Where? By whom?
Are you seriously telling me that multiple nuclear weapons have been detonated already in this war and the big players noticed it but just didn't mention it and everyone else on planet Earth EXCEPT YOU just didn't notice it?
I'm not going to get into the slap fight you are having with everyone else in this comment section, but I am seriously wondering if you are either a hallucinating schizoid or an agent provocateur
Lots of people noticed, you weren't paying attention, which is not my fault.
August 2024, September 2024, March 2025, Morozovsk, Toropets, Engels, etc.
And of course the big players all noticed it, it has been governing subsequent events in a major way.
This was Putin's bluff being called to the maximum extent possible under still some plausible deniability cover. And it was very sucessfully called indeed -- there was no reaction, instead Putin diligently went to "negotiations" instead of physically removing the US from Eurasia, as it was an absolute MUST to do immediately after those events.
What is your evidence that any of those explosions were nuclear?
A nuclear detonation releases both atomic particles and specific vibrations that can be detected literally on the other side of the world.
Why would the Chinese (for example) keep quiet about it?
It's on video and we have satelite footage of the aftermath, as well as on-the-ground footage for at least one of them, all of which are completely incompatible with the official version of "drone debris" setting off ammo depots (hardened ammo depot hangars separated from each other at large distances simply cannot explode into giant mushroom clouds all at once)
>Why would the Chinese (for example) keep quiet about it?
The larger question is why the Kremlin would keep quiet about it.
And the answer should be obvious -- because it had three options:
1) Acknowledge it and retaliate it for it, which means nuclear strikes on NATO with total physical elimination of the threat as the goal.
2) Acknowledge it and don't retaliate for it. Then Russia is officially finished as a great power as then many more such strikes, much more severe too, would immediately follow.
3) Pretend that it didn't happen, absorb the hit, and kick the can down the road.
Clearly, #2 is not a viable option. The correct response was #1, but was not pursued because Putin is a traitor. So that left only #3.
The Chinese are keeping quiet largely for the same reasons.
The West is keeping quiet because first, it cannot acknowledge that it started a nuclear war, and second, it does not want to force the Kremlin's hand to go for option #1. The whole point is to keep these as sneak attacks with some plausible deniability just under the thresholds. It is also why they are limited so far to military objects.
Wha GM forgot to tell you is that that same night Moscow and St Petersburg were wiped out as well. They had to call in the Potemkin family to fix it.
It worked. No one can tell the difference!
Both.
A little from column A and a little from column B…
There was no response because there was nothing to respond to. You have never proven that such ever took place - only in your 6th Column mind.
The only difference between Storm Shadow/SCALP and Taurus is that the latter has a Williams microjet engine whereas the former has a French microjet engine with less thrust.
US has to sign off because Williams is US as is Rockwell/Collins which is part of Raytheon and makes the ECM and guidance systems.
Moving them through Rszezow should be dangerous for Poland now Germany has stated the targets inside Russia
Your dream may come true if Taurus is destroying the Crimea bridge in coming weeks.
I skip your comments
Judging the number of “likes” one might assume that GM (and “Dennis”) are darlings of judeo-banderites.
"...didn't give a f*k about Russian people in Ukraine for 2 decades..."
Are you talking about the time before the coup? Why would Putin care extra about Russians in Ukraine when they still had human rights and were treated as normal citizens?
No, we are not talking just about the time before the coup.
After the coup Moscow tried very hard to push the Donbass back into Ukraine and to wash its hands of the whole matter.
Pro-Russian people in Ukraine were bitterly complaining about being completely abandoned, or even worse.
And the trend was clear long before the coup, so it was an absolute must to stop it before it became the very big problem it is now.
When did the military support for the Donetsk and Luhansk forces start?
Wasn't it already in 2014?
'Not giving a f*ck' is a pretty relative term but when you give people things like a BUK-system for example, I would definitely qualify that as giving something.
There was no Kremlin-initiated support in 2014 that we are certain of.
The opposite kind of stories circulate -- local commanders of tank armies crossing the border on their own initative, some people higher up in the military sending a little bit of support and presenting the Kremlin with the finished fact, etc.
And then Kremlin still did Minsk-1 and Minsk-2, right when the AFU was about to collapse each time...
>It is feared Russia will again use the exercises to launch an invasion from Belarus into Kiev, though this is unlikely.
Extremely unlikely.
Certainly not happening with NATO having given itself permission to strike deep into the Russian rear with missiles and drones, then following up on that permission, and there being no response whatsoever.
Lukashenko is not an idiot, and he also sincerely cares about his people, unlike the traitors in the Kremlin. So he does not want to be left holding the bag, in this case opening up Belarus for 24/7 missile and drone strikes from Ukraine, the way Russia has been suffering for a year now.
Which is what will happen if Belarus is again used to attack Ukraine.
The window for that closed somewhere in early 2023. Because Putin, in his infinite wisdom, refused to mobilize for six months and wasted that crucial first year before it became a true NATO-Russia war and Russia lost its technological advantage, instead of going for the kill when there was still time for it.
I don't see that calculus changing for Belarus, unless Putin finally rolls out the big guns, unshackles the army, and shows that he is serious about winning. And even then.
What this also means is that there will be no escaping from a contested crossing of the Dnieper, even in the still very remote scenario in which Russia clears the left bank.
Question: Who are the imbeciles that 'like' General Moron's ignorant screeds?
The ones who want Russia to:
a) Win harder.
b) Nuke everything and let God sort out the ashes.
c) DIAF
d) All of the above.
It’s all so tiresome….I imagine a bunch of NAFO incels all gathered around a monitor back slowly running out of of trolling options and sobbing about the glory days when they could spout all manner of bullshit and everyone would believe them….
GM = constipation of thought and diarrhea of words.
Keep trying.
A bit of comic relief never hurts. :)
I have given up feeding that particular troll but that doesnt mean everyone else has to….
Your forecasts have all proved wrong from the begining. Putin's long term strategy is beyond brilliant. Strange you dont concede the slightest merit to the Russian command after all they went through and even now that victory is in the air. Your job has been to put down Putin as a capable leader and I seriously doubt about your true intentions.
Where have I been wrong?
What have I predicted? That Russia will sink deeper and deeper in the Ukrainian quagmire unless drastic measures are taken.
What has happened?
Exactly that. The West keeps escalating, Russia is ever more afraid to escalate back. Even after it got literally nuked several times.
I have also been explaining that until the internal deep Russian conflict -- that between the elites, whose interests are fundamentally incompatible with winning the war, and the country as a whole -- is not resolved, the war will remain trending negatively.
It still has not been resolved.
Meanwhile some other people have been predicting imminent AFU collapse and major Russian offensives since late 2022.
Has that happened? No.
Are they doing it again? Yes.
The thing is that not has happened. The truth is exactly the opposite of what you claim. Russia has effectively decoupled from the western external and internal influence, established a solid alliance with China and Iran, despite the sanctions from hell, had economic growth. And many more amazing achievements. Nothing will make you change your rants to the facts. You must know why.
>many more amazing achievements
Such as turning the country into a giant version of Syria, i.e. a place anyone can bomb whenever they feel like, safe in the knowledge there will be no response?
Coincidentally, it was the same people in charge of protecting Syria too.
And we know how that story ended...
From your words one would think Russia is going to capitulate tomorrow. You're laughable.
It already capitulated in March 2022. Putin has been begging for acceptable terms of surrender ever since.
Every serious commentator goes down this rabbit hole at some stage. It's a feature not a bug. There was a sign "Beware all ye who enter".
Belarus don't have the balls.
>In Sumy, Russian forces have begun to make serious strides
This is laughable.
They are moving at the same snail pace as elsewhere -- they took the first villages 3-4 months ago, they are still only 7-8 kilometers deep at most over a 20 km long front along a small section of the border.
This is not quite Chasov Yar-level pitiful, but not all that much better either.
Until there is a broad offensive operation along the whole border that makes gains measured in the tens of kilometers of operational depth, we cannot talk about anything "serious."
In line with that “logic” russia has made no progress in the last 12 months. Have a look at “War Maps” simulations for the last 12 months.
Your idea of military strategy seems to date from the 1800’s and the charge of the light brigade. Stick to reading comics.
That offends the 19th century military thinking.
It took the Army of the Potomac 4 years to cross 100 plus miles between DC and Richmond, but...
Only crazy and ignorant folks would say that the North was not constantly winning pretty much after the first year of the Civil War or that the Northern war plan (the Anaconda Plan) was not well thought out.
I was thinking only of the cretinous charge of the light brigade really, which btw, Sir Queer Stammer seems keen on replicating in Ukraine, using the local oiks this time instead of Brits, giving encouragement via the occasional bomb from their 2 buck shop military.
GM must be English.
Or Estonian... 🤣
Charge of the Light Brigade turned into a famous piece of literature, but if you think about it, the Charge of the Free Leopards was a much more poetry-worthy mission.
In a bad way.
(a good part of the Light Brigade at least reached their destination)
Of course you sit in on all the RU strategy meetings to come up with your conclusions.
What is laughable is that you think you know what you are talking about.
I look at the results.
Did anyone even think seriously about launching large salvos of cruise and ballistic missiles into Russia in 2021? No.
Is this the daily reality now? Yes.
This is the net result of the SMO so far.
Plus the loss of whatever buffer there was with NATO and half a million square kilometers of core historic Russian land, loss that Putin looks supremely uninterested in reversing.
You set up your straw men and then knock them down.
Silly boy/girl/whatever.
Who lost Ukraine to the Nazis?
Whoever was in power since circa 2000..
Who was in power in that time?
We know who.
Who has not recovered Ukraine from the Nazis?
Who refuses steadfastly to attack the Nazis?
Etc. etc. etc. ect.
The "Nazis" you refer to were funded and controlled by a sordid collection of thieves. liars and murderers, ALL OF WHOM BUT ONE were jews. That kind of screws with your dishonest narrative, GM.
You're a foghorn blasting lies and twisted truths into the ether hoping against hope that you will be believed because of your polished delivery - not because of your reasoning, (flawed as it is.)
Even though I don't know enough about mental illness to accurately describe your condition, I still know enough about crazy people to question your motivations and frankly, your sanity.
Who but a troubled but disciplined propagandist could expend so much energy lying about almost everything?
Keep it up. You're losing your arguments even more quickly than the Liars destroying Ukraine for the Tribe are losing theirs. You are a lesson in how not to defend the indefensible.
Describing you as "Peculiar" is an understatement.
You seem to have one thought that goes around in your head like blowfly in an empty room looking for pieces of shit to land on - “Putin Bad”
No because I'm American and you could see the nuclear fires from the moon if someone lunched large salvos of cruise and ballistic missiles into USA.
Bullshit banderist prop assets here look more amd more unmasked and ridiculous as victory nears.
you are both laughable and untrustworthy.
Have you ever walked 10 km in your life? Now imagine doing that with trained professionals dug into prepared positions attempting to kill you every few yards. Or constant drone cover that inhibit the use of any mobile equipment as they will be spotted by modern ISR both day and night. As is there is no comparison to Russia. As no other military can even claim to do better under similar conditions.
No other military would agree on fighting under such conditions when it can simply blockade the enemy and eliminate the supply of drones while destroying the ISR.
Both of which Putin refuses to do for the fourth year now.
Only a stupid enemy would risk expanding a conflict that they don't need to expand. So maybe you are thinking about militaries lacking strategic thinking. On that note Russia has done well, demilitarising the West without directly fighting the west. Classic Tsu Zhu or probably one of the numerous historical Russian strategists.
>demilitarising the West without directly fighting the west
Very little of what is happening in Ukraine has any relevance to a Russia-NATO war.
That war will be fought with aviation, missiles, ships, submarines and air defense.
NATO has an overwhelming advantage in the naval and air domains, Russia has better missiles and much better air defense, but that is offset by the forward deployment factor, which is also overwhelmingly in NATO's favor.
Tanks, artillery and small drones play no role here, thus their "demilitarization" is entirely irrelevant.
Russian air defense degradation, on the other hand, very much is relevant. Both through the physical destruction of assets and the mapping out of air defense positions deep inside Russia.
That the west lost a bunch of Patriots is irrelevant, they were never going to stop the Russian missile salvos into Europe anyway with what they had. Russia, in contrast, does rely on its air defense to protect it, this losing S-400s and their trained crews hurts.
Then the question is who strikes first, and here we again come back to forward deployment. There were no NATO missiles and bases in Ukraine and Finland before 2022, there are now...
What advantage does NATO have? They have a lot of manned aircraft on paper? Majority of Western aircraft have never been tested in actual combat against modern air defences. Plus what is the readiness on NATO aircraft? The US air force already testified Infront of Congress that the premier F35 has only 29% readiness which is probably a gross exaggeration. What naval advantage does NATO have, large surface fleets? NATO countries are heavily dependent on sea trade which would be decimated by Russian submarines. Most of western surface assets would be concentrated on protection of merchant shipping. That would leave the Russian navy as hunters with surface fleets under anti-ship land based umbrella of the Bastion targeting system firing modern Onicks, and Zircon plus older missiles. Bragging about platforms is meaningless if those platforms lack effective offensive capabilities. The war you fantasize about will never happen as the conflict in Ukraine, where Russia all by herself, has humiliated the combined Western alliance demonstrating their utter inability to fight one single super power. On the other hand the Yemenis have have demonstrated that NATO couldn't achieve objectives against one of the poorest countries on the planet. I guess PR marketing and narrative creation can no longer decide outcomes in conflict. Or probably they can attempt to invade Paupau new Guinea or some tiny island preferably inhabited only by penguins to demonstrate some success.
>Majority of Western aircraft have never been tested in actual combat against modern air defences.
1) Old Soviet MiG-29 and Su-27s, and now F-16s too have been flying right to the Russian border launching JDAMs and AASM Hammers into pre-war Russian territory.
S-400s have been pushed back by HIMARS strikes so they have to fire from 150 km and while they occasionally manage to scare the planes off before they launch their bombs, they rarely hit them as they are too far.
Now imagine that being hundreds of planes, not just 2-3 flying at the same time.
2) The main threat will be ALCMs, launched safely away from S-400 coverage altogether.
>F35 has only 29% readiness
29% x 1000 = 290.
Which is still about 10x as many as the total number of Russia Su-57s that Russia has produced.
>What naval advantage does NATO have, large surface fleets?
Calculate how many VLS cells just the US has. It is staggering.
>NATO countries are heavily dependent on sea trade which would be decimated by Russian submarines
Except that NATO has 4-5x as many attack subs as the Russians and has the Atlantic as its own internal lake, with a matching total superiority in ASW assets. Those Russian subs will not last long.
>On the other hand the Yemenis have have demonstrated that NATO couldn't achieve objectives against one of the poorest countries on the planet.
Of course NATO could have achieved its objectives if it truly wanted too, very easily. Was any ship sunk? No. Was Yemen bombed a lot? Yes. So Yemen hasn't shown anything because next time those bombs could be nuclear, and then the Yemeni problem is solved permanently.
The Yemenis would have demonstrated something meaningful if they managed to do proper total area denial. They didn't.
What’s your real name, GM? Are you an Israeli or Ukrainian?
Well who could have predicted that Russia would be in such a dominant position in missiles and drones. Certainly not those who predicted Russia running out of missiles again and again over the course of the war.
Given the ruckus around Russian attacks and the silence around Ukrainian attacks I'd say the Russians are hardening their position and likely will increase the pressure substantially once Ukraine rejects their soon to be completed memorandum on finishing the war.
I really enjoyed the last paid article comments. The lack of trolling was very refreshing. Sadly all good things come to an end.
Yes, sad, indeed❤️🐈⬛💙🇷🇺❤️
The trolling is how we familiarize ourselves with the kinds of thinking promulgated by the "other side", abcdefg.
We need to learn as much as we can about these defective thinkers and who controls them. They are our enemies...never forget that.
Very good point.
Nothing like a paywall to keep the riff and the raff out of the country club….
One of the main reasons i would actually pay for it…
Go ahead NATO, keep throwing your remaining weapons stocks away in the Ukraine...I suspect that is exactly what Putin wants...
It is certainly what China wants.
I couldn't resist
https://www.instagram.com/share/BACfCI4F5W
Beautiful :) That trump eagle certainly quivers
then - another one:
https://www.instagram.com/share/BAiCL9LTUk
they taxed our fish
than asked for more...
Yeah, it’s starting to feel like we’ve crossed some invisible line where Ukraine’s defenses aren’t just strained, they’re getting systematically outpaced. What stood out most to me wasn’t even the hardware upgrades or sheer volume of strikes, but how casually the reports describe Ukrainian units stuck for months with barely any rotation or support. That’s survival mode. And meanwhile, Russia’s not just keeping up, they’re evolving mid-fight.
Kinda wild how fast the whole drone game flipped too. Not sure how anyone can look at all this and still pretend it’s business as usual.
Any day now right? I've been hearing for 3 years Ukraine about to collapse. That Idiot Col MacGregor been saying it since 2022. Well good thing is Simp and other Z-anons will have many more years of income streams as Ukraine does not collapse and they can continue writing and youtubing their "observations".
Most people here are clueless Westerners who have no idea of the history.
UPA fought to the death all the way until the mid-1950s.
This with their Western backers being 700+ km away, and thus UPA being under total blockade, and also having no support whatsoever once you moved east of Ternopol.
For comparison, Putin has done absolutely nothing to either:
1) Blockade Ukraine
2) Stop the Banderite mental virus from infecting most of the space between Ternopol and Kharkov in the previous two decades.
So yeah, good luck waiting for them to collapse any time soon under such conditions.
There is no military solution that does not involve nuking NATO in Europe so that Ukraine can be blockaded.
I knew about it. Think they were defeated a year after Stalin's death and 8 years after Nazi benefactor Germany was. The forever insurgency to some both inside and outside Russia I never bring up becuase Russia has to win first to see it.
There has in fact been no real insurgency to speak of in Kherson. Had there been no SBU in Kiev to orchestrate those, even the car bombings that did happen would not have happened.
Kherson is used as an example as it was the least pro-Russian region that Russia captured. Nikolaev and Odessa are much more pro-Russian in comparison.
Ivano-Frankovsk and Lvov will be rough for sure. But the east and even the center should not be too hard to control.
Most importantly, is it better to fight guerillas or large NATO-standard armies?
Echo, echo, echo...
The good news in your "analysis" is that you'll be able to post shit for years to come as well.
Do you see the Kremlin making any moves to blockade Ukraine from the west and south?
I don't.
That is the most criticial necessary condition for ending this shit show.
Unless that is done, this will indeed last forever, at an ever worsening for Russia balance of fire exchange.
Why would they do that, Russia doesn't seem to be having issues supporting their economy and can keep up the war for years and they are attriting NATO, not just their proxy, Ukraine?
>Why would they do that
Because drones fly deep into Russia in triple digit numbers 24/7 and cruise and ballistic missiles were also fired and are soon to be fired again.
That sounds like something that must be stopped ASAP to people who still have their brains functioning.
I'm not saying it's the preferred way to go but the thing about your assertion is that all of the West/NATO doesn't have the capacity to maintain that, while Russia does.
If you want to drain an enemy of its ammo and weaponry, you don't stop it from supplying. NATO member states are already complaining about their increasingly lack of such - I wonder why that is.
Ammo is irrelevant to a NATO-Russia war.
It won't be fought with artillery in the trenches.
What it will be fought with Russia either is at a severe disadvantage already, or has been attrited in during this war.
Artillery is irrelevant? This is some revelation.
Yes grr cause it seems the not war will continue for years well until a business deal can be arranged between the Russian oligarchs and the western corporations and the Trump family or some decisive action as mentioned by GM occurs.
Ah the classic “what’s taking them so long troll”….!
To be fair it’s one of the few that doesnt get laughed off the comment section so I can see what they stick with it.
I can imagine during WWII the same kind of troll being tried, were there an internet. Goebbels tried a bit with the V-weapons thing. He realized that overcoming the bad news from the fronts was impossible and didn't even try. Luckily, today's neocons and Ukronazi stooges are foolish enough to try to say demonstrably false things.
This has been a war of attrition since virtually the beginning. It takes a long time to destroy the enemy's force generation capability. Particularly in a proxy war like this. It's proceeding apace and it will be done when it is done. That's why all the noise about ceasefires and such. They see the endgame as clearly as I do. I was pretty certain that the front would be widened and it has been. It will be widened further before this is over.
First, materiel dominance is achieved over the enemy. Already done. Demonstrate the futility of offensive action. Already done. Eroding the enemy's forces, in progress and closer to completion than people probably imagine. Lastly, the destruction of enemy morale. This is why the propaganda war is in full swing, but Ukrainians themselves cannot be fooled. They know they are losing and this will continue to be obvious. I can't imagine them surrendering en masse but individual units? We will see more and more of that as time goes on.
The whiners are going to whine. It's all about somehow avoiding the fatal endgame for Ukraine. It is not possible. Ukraine is doomed and we all know it.
And there has been so great propaganda at that….the last one I recall being published on this SitRep was heartbreaking….it was the “then & now” short video that shows various examples of the Ukrainian populace… air tight too ,because: true!
Truth in propaganda is a key element, another Goebbels dictum. He was a pretty smart guy, despite being a Nazi. Having his diaries from much of the war is a treasure trove.
Yes, the word is used as a pejorative intended to render whatever material is being critiqued as invalid or false….
That is not what it actually means as you’ve noted.
Kinda like calling everything I disagree with or do not understand a ‘conspiracy theory’.
Every liar knows the most effective lies are built on the armature of truth
The honorable Colonel Douglas MacGregor is a true American patriot hated by the tribe and MIC
Kellogg is turning Sun Tzu upside down: Sun Tzu advised against provoking needless wars and, once at war, needless battles, paying great attention to how costly these are. But trotting things out that flatly contradict what they are saying as if they vindicate them has been something Western "leaders" have been doing for a while...
ROFLMAO!!!
Nothing quite like completely missing the point when you quote a source you have never read…..
Trumps biggest mistake is having that idiot kellogg on his team, and continuing to listen to him and let him run things. He had the right instinct with Witkoff, at least the guy went to Moscow, but then was sidelined
On the drones and missiles, so, are we supposed to believe the 2024 or 2023 90% shoot down rates then? Or the 30% now? Also how effective are these hits?
Mind that the 90% shotdowns were official Ukrainian figures, often falsified when out of a 100 raid, over 50 relevant hits were not to documented, sometimes even more shootdowns claimed than UAV or missiles fired.
It may have to be done not only with propaganda, bur also increasing use of chaff and decoys during approach of the projectiles.
Thank you for the regular updates on this NATO inspired debacle
I've always said that the simple planform of the Geran allows for an easy ramp up to quite large serial production numbers. 100 per day is hardly a beginning. If something significantly more complex than a Geran (eg: a car) can be manufactured at a rate of one per minute, then so can a Geran.
The thought of how far *China* could ramp up production of such a drone should give US military planners serious pause for thought, number one of which should be "do not fight China".
They think all the time - mainly about their next job with a defense company.
Speaking of China
Drone Mothership
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoVFalzgP6A
Sitting duck for air defense.
Such planes are usually protected by attack fighters.
This is a drone.
Slow and heavy.
Nevertheless it will be protected. They will not send such a ship into areas where they are not protected.
Cars are the proper comparison indeed. The complexity is probably about the same, not lower. Yes, there are fewer parts here, but the good Gerans feature a jet engine and some non-trivial guidance systems, so it evens out.
China makes 30M cars a year, or 60 cars a minute.
Russia makes about a million cars, or 2 per minute, or 3000 a day roughly.
P.S. At some point the production of explosives becomes the limiting factor.
Good thing Russia is also ramping explosive production.
Geran is vastly *less* complex than a modern car, the jet engine is simpler than a V6 with full emissions control (never mind the air-cooled bike engine version) and the guidance system would be a trivial subset of the average car infotainment centre.
Shahed Drones Now Nearly Twice as Powerful — Russian Military Enhances Payload and Capabilities
Russian forces have significantly upgraded the combat effectiveness of their Shahed drones, according to a report by Defense Express. The drones, known in Russian service as "Geran," now carry an increased warhead payload — from 50 kg to 90 kg — making them substantially more destructive.
Russian sources had earlier reported that the "Geran" drones had been modernized with improved flight speed and altitude, enhancing their ability to bypass Ukrainian air defenses.
https://t.me/DDGeopolitics/148507
Trump should be calling for Ukraine's immediate surrender so that proper peace talks acknowledging the realities on the ground, can take place.
Ukraine agrees to withdraw from the four regions which we assume is still a window just about open to it, and the fighting will stop. Of course all the other conditions must be met including Zelenskiiy and his team offing it to europe and Ukraine becoming neutral and demilitarised etc, but at least this will be achieved under peaceful conditions as opposed to through military means, which is what Russia will otherwise do.
Assuming the west does not want to fight Russia directly in europe (even if it could with its own troops en masse), this is the only way forward. It also preserves the idea of Ukraine after a fashion (although why Russia would still allow this is a matter of debate within Russia whose population is adjusted to the idea of fighting this war to its ideal end).
The favoured western option however seems to be to just go on chest thumping while committing economic suicide, lobbing missiles at the RF, obliging Russia to bring its full force and form right up to existing NATO boundaries (assuming NATO survives this. Trump is already pulling his own fire power and men out of europe and out of NATO, and if the euronuts continue with their death wish, there will be no NATO for them to cower behind if they plunge their people into a hot war here.
Which of course they won't. What do you do with leaders running off at the mouth like cocaine heads? Stick those heads in the toilet pan and flush.
A couple of things.
First, the Russians demand for Ukraine to abandon Kherson City, Zaporozhye City, and the other big cities in Donetsk would never be accepted by the Ukrainians. It's obviously there to allow the Russians to talk peace but continue the SMO to suit their needs.
Second, the situation with Europe and Russia potentially going to war shows how history rhymes again. It's the same plan used by USUK in the 1930s. The US is always going to be the winner here, although this time there is a good chance China will be the bigger winner. Thereby all the "pivot to China" rhetoric and destabilisation of West, Central and South Asia. All said there is a fair chance this spirals out of control. Too many competing interests. Welcome to the birth of multipolarity.
I am sorry I did not make myself clear. If the US withdraws all support and 'advises' Ukraine to surrender to the terms as set out, Ukraine has no choice. Of course it won't otherwise do a deal.
As to a world-wide war, this Ukraine conflict is a longstanding local conflict and will dwindle to those terms if the US gets the hell out of it.
USUK instigated the conflict and continue to support it. When Russia and the US fight it is no "local conflict". It is about the future direction of international systems. BRICS are target number one.
Somehow I doubt that. The Banderites will continue to fight and the globalist elites in Europe will continue to supply as much as they can. They don't give a damn how many Ukrainians die. It all fits into the globalist plan of population reduction.
I seriously doubt it fits into any globalist plan of population reduction, killing a million here or there has been tried by the US for decades with no noticeable 'progress', it's more about destroying Russia and getting cheap access to their resources. It's about economic success, the same way Britain did it when they contributed to the 'excess deaths' of between 100 and 165 million Indians alone during the 40 years between 1880 and 1920, than population control. They couldn't care less if there are 50 billion people, with everyone living a shit life and starving, as long as they aren't in that group.
Not only that, the people involved in this operation have come right out and said it!
But being in the USA, if I mention such matters all i get is a vacant stare….
You don't have to be in the US for that reaction!
I don't see Trump being able to stop the war, even if he wanted to, the 'deep state'/neocons or whatever you want to call it, are dead set on defeating Russia, they will not stop.
The same nasty combine that off'd JFK is responsible for the current UKE debacle. Now it becomes more and more about narrative management Here in the USA! where I wake up. No matter the vote...you always get more war. This is just another version of "Manifest Destiny". How did these Arabs end up sitting on OUR oil!? How did these awful Slavs end up sitting on this cornucopia of natural resources?! OUR natural resources...aka as money in the portfolio/bank. Mo' money...mo' money...mo' money!
.
In a rational world these western war mongers would be hanging from every tree and lamp post. Never too late to start. Bigly sad...
>It's the same plan used by USUK in the 1930s. The US is always going to be the winner here, although this time there is a good chance China will be the bigger winner
It is the same plan indeed -- instigate a major war on the continent, sweep up the pieces.
But there is a major difference -- it is working so far only because the Kremlin is inhabitted by traitors who want to be friends with the West again.
The Kremlin could have and still can at any time put an end to the game by annihilating Europe and physically eliminating the threat. At zero cost to itself, leaving the UK and the US as the losers.
It has not happened only because the interests of the Russian elites are at odds with the interests of the Russian people, and it is the former in power, not the latter
what about the attack on Putin's helicopter ? Maybe I missed it in the last article ?
I've seen a few references to that but no details anywhere. Is it certain it was a targetted attack vs the helicopter just happening to be in the vicinity of enemy drones?
I'm sure it was legit. The RF announced it. And then there was that huge retaliation and Putin said today - no more debates - can't remember the exact quote but it was withering. And Trump says he furious with Putin and I even read there is going to be a big escalation now. In my ( not so ) humble opinion - if zelensky is now trying to assassinate Putin - then its game on for him too
>And then there was that huge retaliation
Where?
There was absolutely no retaliation, as usual.
Yeah woteva. The oracle speaks. All bow to it’s wisdom.
Well a bigger than usual bombardment but nothing decisive though.
A retaliation for trying to kill Putin would have been finally taking out Zelensky. Budanov and Malyuk.
That wasn't done. Not for the first time -- they have tried to kill Putin multiple times in the past, and even bragged about it.
Bombing the Antonov plant is not retaliation.
It is a scandal.
A scandal because An-196 drones have been flying deep into Russia for more than a year now and the Antonov plant was not touched all that time until now.
Which raises a lot of questions...
wow. I don't even know where to begin. Follow William Schryver on X or also his substack - but his X account is fantastic. Him and Simplicius know each other for sure. Those missiles they used to bomb last night or maybe the night before were new. And they hit really important stuff. Anyway - I can see that you and I would be talking for hours if I was to educate you on stuff you should know about if you're going to say stuff like that. Nevermind
GM—calling Putin a “traitor” causes whatever you have to say to be immediately devalued if not dismissed. Listen to the way he speaks. Read what he has to say (even in translation)—how he represents his country. Such monumental treachery CANNOT be sequestered—it would bleed through in the most telling situations. And dozens, if not hundreds would have to be party to such a conspiracy, including such highly-regarded people like Lavrov, always the smartest guy in the room.
Yes it surely does but it seems most people blithely accept it as ok even say all part of the plan nothing to worry about here move on, keep up the struggle to expose the true situation GM.
Interesting. The “retaliation” wasn’t though as the big missile and drone strikes are planned well in advance. That huge strikes’ timing was a coincidence.
Also how would NATO know in advance VVP would be flying there?
Zelenskyy is too much of a coke snorting clown and asset to Russia for Russia to ever want to assassinate him.
See John Helmers report though still not stating direct attack on Putins helicopter but dramatic uptick in volume of incoming on Kursk at time of Putins arrival hence supposed reason for large scale attack by RFed. Otherwise all would be as normal slowly slowly and little by little.
Too bad they missed. Maybe a Russian patriot would take charge then.
ESAD.