@bucho@lemmy.one How do you think the war is going buddy? Fingers crossed the meatgrinder will continue and even more will die?
If you want it for some reason
This was one of the funniest things posted here.
The reason Ukraine isn't winning is the realities on the ground, but in my head they're much cooler than the Russian army and that could pay off eventually.
I wanted to post the old callout thread too, but it got nuked with the rest of my account. It was great though, so many libs coming in to argue that they loved Ukraine which is why they wanted ukrainians to fight to the last
Edit: I guess you can still find it on test.hexbear.net, which is a bit disconcerting
NATO tactics assume no mines and air superiority
Wow it turns out basing your entire military doctrine around oppressing poor farmers and workers in the global south means you'll struggle in a peer conflict, who could've forseen this
NATO tactics assume no, or very few mines
I'm hoping this is actually true and not just armchair-general speculation, because it would be hilarious.
Especially stupid because the main killer of US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan were IEDs. Over 20 years in the sandbox and they didn't think other countries would create something more sophisticated than fertilizer and a cell phone?
Exactly, didn't the US military have a whole new line of combat vehicle specifically to deal with all that?
Reading the history of prior MRAP-like vehicles is an escalating series of
. Originally conceived of by Rhodesia's military, with a lot of further development by apartheid-era South Africa, especially by their police.
tbh all this talk about "tactics" and "doctrines" sounds like complete bullshit to me. There isn't a military in the world that knows exactly what it's doing or how to fight a modern war
What's the quote? "We're always preparing how to fight the last war." I think that's how it goes.
NATO doctrine relies on air superiority, immediately falls apart when that's not true Still superior to their opponents though
They have excellent training, which is why they continue to follow a military doctrine that is known to only work in a radically environment than the one they find themselves in?
there's a decent chance of more unrest in Moscow, which would likely move Russians off the front line to quell any dissent back home
so just imagining the political and social conditions of a place you've never been with a language you don't speak, and then assuming that to be true
There are no cops in Russia, they just use the one army for everything
Also army can only be in one place at once. Russia never figured out how to build multiple armies. So you can fight Ukraine or you can quell dissent. But doing both at once impossible, that's like an enlightenment era tech. And as we all know the Russians are barbaric orcs who can't technology.
Chance of unrest means Russia has to build the building that builds shotgun guys further from the front.
comments like this are a great demonstration of why being more informed doesn't really give you a better grasp on reality. "Russia is a bigger country, and Ukraine is dependent on the goodwill of nations that are historically uninterested in ending warfare and restoring stability" is all you really need to know.
This is typical of the liberal brain pan commenting on foreign countries. "If this, then it's likely, then maybe, then possibly, and thus." It's based on immaterial assumption after immaterial assumption.
Takes like this are a dime a dozen among pro-NATO Europeans. They are not ready for the hardships they will soon have to face.
War had ground to a standstill for 12 entire months by the time that was posted, UA out-artilleried 5 to 1 and without air superiority, and someone thought they could make a breakout move.
