Ukraine told critics of the pace of its three-month-old counteroffensive to "shut up" on Thursday, the sharpest signal yet of Kyiv's frustration at leaks from Western officials that say its forces are advancing too slowly.
Then why do you think they're gathering intel? Surely the situation is very different in Ukraine. A weapon system is context dependent, it doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Who is this we? And why are you so sure? I'm not saying you are some guy working for the government I'm just saying you are making shit up and read too much of OSINT twitter so you feel 'in the know'. You don't know what intel is being gathered, if that intel even gets out or not. Like why should the US feel compelled to share with Ukraine? Because they are on the same side? From the few statements they seem more interested in using the war to pay off the MIC similar to Afghanistan and it doesn't seem like any intel was gained over a 20 year period.
Lol that's not how this works. Saying "We share intelligence" is worlds apart from what you want to imply here, again stop being some weird wannabe OSINT guy, at most Ukranians get satellite images which technically is 'sharing intelligence' but not what you are trying to imply here.
Judging by the number of western vehicles lost to mines in the last few weeks alone they do not perform the same fighting a peer military with access to large amounts of modern equipment vs ill equipped militias fighting an insurgency
No, but they haven't faced massive minefields, helicopter gunships, artillery, electronic countermeasures, airstrikes, etc when occupying Iraq or Afghanistan. Fighting guerrillas and fighting a peer army are two entirely different beasts, and we see the proof in more western tanks being lost in 2 months than USA lost in 2 decades in Iraq or Afghanistan
A butter knife works the same when cutting butter or steel. It still isn't useful for cutting steel. This is what they're trying to communicate.
A reaper drone works the same when blowing up random weddings or when flying in airspace with a networked AA system of S300s, S400s, and S500s
Which is to say we know the underlying physics continues to operate the same but the context changes how useful the equipment is, because a butterknife is made for butter and a Reaper is made for blowing up weddings without an air defense network nearby.
They had gunships in Afghanistan and US still lost, not sure I see your point here. Not to mention the Taliban didn't have close to the anti-aircraft capabilities that the Russian military has. AC-130s work fine for bombing defenseless hospitals, but against a force with radar, electronic countermeasures, anti-aircraft missiles, fighter jets, and all the other tools that a modern military has access to? I think the gunships would not be nearly as effective as you think
I do find these comments entertaining. It reinforces my belief that US hubris is leading to it's decline. Imagine believing your own lies when its literally your country's existence on the line.
We clearly have fundamental, serious issues -- but you'd have to be completely delusional if "actual millitary strength" is something you think the USA lacks and Russia is anyway comparable. They're in a stalemate with with a small country using 40 year old western equipment.
The US lost Afghanistan where their enemies had no airsupport and old equipmemt and weren't being supplied by the global hegemon. They also lost Vietnam which they fought a much smaller less well equipped country.
So it seems you aren't aware about the $50 billion of military hardware, training, mercenaries, and aid that NATO have provided Ukraine since 2014. Are you being disingeneous for the sake of winning the argument or are you acting in good faith? I need to know whether I should continue to engage or if you're just trolling/playing dumb.
For sure. Thinking of this war as a giant test ground for defense industry ghouls to experiment on is horrifying
The US has had its weapons used in conflicts for years. Yes, they do what they're supposed to do. Not much to learn, really.
Then why do you think they're gathering intel? Surely the situation is very different in Ukraine. A weapon system is context dependent, it doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Intel is a tool which the US has high capability and it takes many forms. I am sure we share this intel with the Ukrainians
Who is this we? And why are you so sure? I'm not saying you are some guy working for the government I'm just saying you are making shit up and read too much of OSINT twitter so you feel 'in the know'. You don't know what intel is being gathered, if that intel even gets out or not. Like why should the US feel compelled to share with Ukraine? Because they are on the same side? From the few statements they seem more interested in using the war to pay off the MIC similar to Afghanistan and it doesn't seem like any intel was gained over a 20 year period.
I am sure because it is publicly reported that we (the US) does share intelligence with Ukraine. Hope that helps
"we (the US)"
Imagine identifying with the US imperialist world order. They aren't going to let you wear the boot, no matter how hard you lick
Is there anything more imperialist than invading another country?
Yes. The global order of monopolistic capitalist extraction and exploitation of the global south
Inavasion does not equal imperialism
the US has been at war almost every year since its inception
You'll be sad to hear that the US has in fact invaded other countries before
Lol that's not how this works. Saying "We share intelligence" is worlds apart from what you want to imply here, again stop being some weird wannabe OSINT guy, at most Ukranians get satellite images which technically is 'sharing intelligence' but not what you are trying to imply here.
Not as much intelligence as it shares with discord leaker man. Lots of those docs were classified noforn.
Just another stunning victory of US intelligence.
deleted by creator
Either way they work the same.
Judging by the number of western vehicles lost to mines in the last few weeks alone they do not perform the same fighting a peer military with access to large amounts of modern equipment vs ill equipped militias fighting an insurgency
You expect those vehicles will not be damaged by mines huh.
No, but they haven't faced massive minefields, helicopter gunships, artillery, electronic countermeasures, airstrikes, etc when occupying Iraq or Afghanistan. Fighting guerrillas and fighting a peer army are two entirely different beasts, and we see the proof in more western tanks being lost in 2 months than USA lost in 2 decades in Iraq or Afghanistan
Also, America keeps losing wars to those guerilla fighters let alone an army with actual military doctorine
A butter knife works the same when cutting butter or steel. It still isn't useful for cutting steel. This is what they're trying to communicate.
A reaper drone works the same when blowing up random weddings or when flying in airspace with a networked AA system of S300s, S400s, and S500s
Which is to say we know the underlying physics continues to operate the same but the context changes how useful the equipment is, because a butterknife is made for butter and a Reaper is made for blowing up weddings without an air defense network nearby.
so, not at all, considering they even lost in Afghanistan
There you go. Time to give Ukraine some AC 130 gun ships. Good suggestion.
What, are there Russian hospitals in need of bombing? C130 can't operate if there is air defense
Just like Afghanistan. Always bragging until Puff shows up.
The degree to which you identify with the US war machine is really sad.
you need to be locked away
They had gunships in Afghanistan and US still lost, not sure I see your point here. Not to mention the Taliban didn't have close to the anti-aircraft capabilities that the Russian military has. AC-130s work fine for bombing defenseless hospitals, but against a force with radar, electronic countermeasures, anti-aircraft missiles, fighter jets, and all the other tools that a modern military has access to? I think the gunships would not be nearly as effective as you think
Russia has the best air defense in the world. C-130 is a big slow moving target. Even in Afghanistan they operated only at night.
Sure the best...right
I assume you believe China has the best?
Regardless C-130 gunships are a hilariously bad idea. This isn't Call of Duty son.
Or course it can't be the best, because they aren't the USA
That must be why America keeps losing to farmers on the opposite side of the world.
Not really, no.
I mean ... calling Russia's military a "peer" is a stretch.
I do find these comments entertaining. It reinforces my belief that US hubris is leading to it's decline. Imagine believing your own lies when its literally your country's existence on the line.
... K
We clearly have fundamental, serious issues -- but you'd have to be completely delusional if "actual millitary strength" is something you think the USA lacks and Russia is anyway comparable. They're in a stalemate with with a small country using 40 year old western equipment.
The US lost Afghanistan where their enemies had no airsupport and old equipmemt and weren't being supplied by the global hegemon. They also lost Vietnam which they fought a much smaller less well equipped country.
So it seems you aren't aware about the $50 billion of military hardware, training, mercenaries, and aid that NATO have provided Ukraine since 2014. Are you being disingeneous for the sake of winning the argument or are you acting in good faith? I need to know whether I should continue to engage or if you're just trolling/playing dumb.
Is it?