• @dolphin
    hexbear
    40
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    deleted by creator

      • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]
        hexbear
        39
        9 months ago

        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

          • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]
            hexbear
            32
            9 months ago

            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

            • Adkml [he/him]
              hexbear
              26
              edit-2
              9 months ago

              Also, America keeps losing wars to those guerilla fighters let alone an army with actual military doctorine

      • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]
        hexbear
        38
        9 months ago

        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.

          • FALGSConaut [comrade/them]
            hexbear
            22
            9 months ago

            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

          • Annakah69 [she/her]
            hexbear
            18
            9 months ago

            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.

      • Adkml [he/him]
        hexbear
        22
        9 months ago

        That must be why America keeps losing to farmers on the opposite side of the world.

      • @Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
        hexbear
        13
        9 months ago

        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.

        • @oatscoop@midwest.social
          hexbear
          1
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          ... 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.

          • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]
            hexbear
            5
            9 months ago

            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.

          • @Hexadecimalkink@lemmy.ml
            hexbear
            3
            9 months ago

            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.