Not to mention the mines. Is very easy to be an armchair general while others clear the way for the infantrymen.
@Bidmartinlo
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine lost the advantage after being satisfied with themselves after their blitz and long before this NATO forgot about Ukraine for several years, pretending like nothing was happening there for years. Even an "armchair general", like myself, can tell you without a shadow of a doubt: We failed. Russia failed and fails harder, but it is clear that we are not effective enough to fight threats. Like imagine if the Putin regime was actually competent.. It's doubtful they'd need to invade anyone.
@LewisPulsipher
Жыл бұрын
#1 thing to remember about this offensive: it is being conducted while the defenders have at least the potential to have air superiority, and the attackers definitely do not. It is not like anything NATO has ever contemplated.
@akaroth7542
Жыл бұрын
This 💯
@fanglethorpe
Жыл бұрын
Ukrainians are planning for a war of attrition while they are attacking mine fields and heavily entrenched positions? And it all hinges on the Russian's not mobilizing again... WOW that sounds dumb as sh*t!!!
@gunnarisaksson8677
Жыл бұрын
Yes that was also my thinking.
@ChillingCrowley
Жыл бұрын
Russia has more air superiority than Ukraine, they are using attack helicopters effectively and Ukraine doesn't have an answer at the moment. If F16 arrive in a timely fashion Ukraine still won't have air superiority. Sad but true
@francescozambaldi8212
Жыл бұрын
NATO knows it but they send ukros to die without problems i see. Well done democracy!
@T33K3SS3LCH3N
Жыл бұрын
12:00 there is the quite possible theory that Ukraine already knew that a mobilised push would be unlikely to work, but that they had to "prove it" to the west. Since many western backers were pushing them to adopt NATO doctrines and to try decisive moves to "end it already". So Ukraine tried it exactly once, with a force that showed that they were serious, but were already prepare to move away from it if it didn't work out. The German tank general who oversees their Ukraine effort subsequently said that there is no way that western doctrine could work under such circumstances. That the creed of German armored forces is to quickly circumvent mine barriers, but that there is no way around a minefield that spans the entire front line. Hence he was pushing for the delivery of a large amount of smoke shells in an effort to make the mine clearing operations at least a little harder to spot.
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
Yeah. Just fire smoke shells and see if the Russians waste ammunition on saturating bombardment, which might clear a few mines in the process. A productive use of the fog of war.
@chrimony
Жыл бұрын
@@swarmpope9608 Especially considering that Russia was lampooned by military analysis channels for their winter offensive of tanks running into minefields.
@Michael-x8e7j
Жыл бұрын
If Ukraine actually did this than Nato is on the wrong side so let's just call that a conspiracy theory
@LordGrantius
Жыл бұрын
@@swarmpope9608 I understand your sentiment, unfortunately I would not be surprised if this is true. The support of the west is conditional. We donate weapons and munitions and we expect them to be used. If Ukraine was hoarding the platforms while demanding more, the West would turn even faster against them. This is the sad but true reality, I believe. Ukrainian lives had to be sacrificed as a show for us to consume, so we could understand it's "real", and so we continue our support. Repelling an invader is not something we care much about. As a Canadian, the lesson I took from our experience in Afghanistan is that we want the maximum results with the bare minimum of effort, and when things invariably fail, we shrug and say, "well, we tried." If I were a better person, I would try and do more, even go help directly. As it is the best I feel able and willing to do is argue online for greater commitment of our countries to Ukraines cause, and hope we don't let the Ukrainian people down. Undoubtedly, some Ukrainian bodies lay shattered and torn from our tepid and uncertain response already, and that is a shame we bear - but most of us simply don't care
@notfreeman1776
Жыл бұрын
@@swarmpope9608 when western support is your war efforts lifeline i would be inclined to blame the western leaders who pushed for it in the first place rather than the Ukranians who could not possibly risk looking like they're not in it to win
@tommysellering4224
Жыл бұрын
If Ukraine “wins” the land in the timeline that US tactical experts wants, they will probably loose so much people and equipment that they would be handing over the initiative to Russia. Russia can fight like this for years to come. Ukraine doesn’t have the people to loose that many experienced people to win a pyrrhic victory.
@InfinityHS
Жыл бұрын
Them Russian niqqas getting popped. You sure? Lol
@ChaosEIC
Жыл бұрын
I am not sure if Russia can fight like this for years. They are losing Artillery at an alarming rate. But other than Artillery, I think they can fight like this for years.
@raulwhitefeather963
Жыл бұрын
@@ChaosEICRussia's economy, army, everything, is now stronger than ever. This channel totally acts as if Western Proaganda is gospel. It's not. Russia is not anywhere near collapsing or politically on thin legs. Meanwhile, Ukraine just can't get enough weapons or soldiers, that's why it keeps broadening the age range for conscripts and increasing punishment for abandonment. Weird.
@Jugement
Жыл бұрын
Yep, but the west pays for its weapons. And it doesnt want to keep doing as such for the 10 years to come. So of course it pressured Ukraine for results lmao. The US alone spent $113B. Thats twice the anual military budget of Russia served on a silver platter. If Ukraine cant achieve meaningful results with that much, then in the eyes of the politicians, its doomed anyway As such, this video is utter BS and copium. Ukraine doesnt benefit from an attrition war, simply because it can not afford it on its own unlike Russia, and is under the constant threat of loosing its sponsor
@Jugement
Жыл бұрын
@@ChaosEIC They have more than 20.000 pieces total with most of it still sitting in reserve. They can go for a very long time before they dry out the soviet era stocks for sure. Public info available on Wikipedia btw
@Queldonus
Жыл бұрын
If Ukraine is going to engage in NATO style battle tactics, then it needs NATO levels of fire support. That would mean enough aircraft and ordinance to have total air superiority. I personally would be OK with giving them every piece of ordinance and every vehicle that they can handle. It would be at a higher monetary cost, but a shorter war and ultimately fewer lives lost.
@hotdogcaptain11
Жыл бұрын
No one expected them to have air superiority going into the counteroffensive and there was still a realistic chance of success. The reality is Russians were better prepared than expected, combined arms is hard, ukraine didn’t concentrate forces and used inexperienced units that screwed up coordination. Weight these however you like.
@TouringWolf42
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine would even need a navy. A big aspect of NATO's operations is aircraft carrier missions. They can't expect Ukraine to perform the same.
@rogerpennel1798
Жыл бұрын
I believe that Ukraine needs to: 1)Destroy the Kerch bridges. Eliminate them as a supply corridor and escape route. 2)Move their southern front forward enough to bring the coastal supply routes within range of artillery. 3)Transition to a hybrid warfare model with a large-scale insurgency and uprising during the winter. The goal is to destroy Russian logistics hubs and deny the Russians food, fuel, and shelter during the depths of winter. Destroy every bridge, burn down every warehouse, rip up train tracks, destroy power lines, destroy phone lines, destroy waterworks and sanitation. 4)Force the Russians to rely on shipping to resupply their forces in Crimea and destroy their navy.
@ByZHellas
Жыл бұрын
Yeah but superpowers want to keep wars going to sell more equipment and make more money. Ukraine is now in debt to the West big time, even if they win the war, which is looking less promising as time goes on, it’s probably just gonna be a bigger version of the Donbass frozen conflict, they are going to be a puppet state to the West with how much is going to be owed.
@kingace6186
Жыл бұрын
At the end of the day, the Ukrainian Armed Forces are an army-focused military. It would take a long while to get enough F-16s in the sky, so no battles for air superiority anytime soon. The navy is the weakest arm of the UAF and will only matter in a future Battle for Crimea. So NATO's military doctrine was never gonna be the solution for Ukraine. The next best thing is to wear down the Russian forces while gambling on low reinforcements, causing a major breakdown in the Surovikin Line. But for this, the Ukrainian Army is going to need serious artillery commitments from NATO to minimize potential casualties.
@everTriumph
Жыл бұрын
One argument against the 'group a large force and punch through' depends on your enemies cooperation. If the enemy retreated rather than resisted, and mirrored your tactics by mounting a similar attack off to one less defended side, you may find your forces enveloped. Ukraine's tactic of 'fixing' Russian forces is slow, but relatively safe from massive losses by encirclement.
@jklmn101
Жыл бұрын
Excellent argument, and one borne out at present on the battlefield where Ukraine is constantly working to widen its gains on the field, making envelopment far less of a concern. They've also been making very good use of the longer range capabilities of the western artillery they've been supplied without bringing it too far forward and putting it at risk. They obviously need more long range munitions, and I believe they are prepared to make good use of them should they get them. I think if they get them, they will begin to concentrate a good deal of it towards taking out Russian air defense assets, allowing for better use of not just the western aircraft they will be getting, but to also use the whole of it as a force multiplier for the existing old soviet aircraft they currently have. If they can do that, I believe we will begin to see the kinds of movement that the west has been looking for. And they will be doing it against a much more depleted Russian army.
@nvelsen1975
Жыл бұрын
Not just that, but the way Russia does war, with a rigid officer-centered, top-down, push-logistics way, favours large semi-static engagements and big decisive battles. A big push would play right into the strengths of Russia's system, on top of allowing them to just throw more cannon fodder at the problem which is also their thing. Over a few weeks of fighting, general Sovietovich would work out a plan for this static area of operations where everything takes place, just like he was taught in Moscow in the 1980s. Hitting Russia all over keeps their planning, their logistics guessing and reacting to what Ukraine does. This would mean that by the time general Sovietovich has drawn up his master plan, well, it's not toilet paper since the focus has shifted and he needs to drive over to the next section of frontline and re-plan everything. By contrast Ukraine uses or tries to use, the NATO style command and logistics system, both of which have adapting-as-they-go as their core philosophy. To word it differently, Ukraine reacts to chaos better than Russia, so it's in their interest to have more chaos on the frontlines.
@jensholm5759
Жыл бұрын
good comment.
@XIIchiron78
Жыл бұрын
Grouping up a large force when you don't have air superiority and the enemy has plenty of planes they could risk in theory to wipe you out is asking for a disaster tbh
@timgerk3262
Жыл бұрын
In contrast to a football (or soccer) game, the goal is not necessarily to move the ball down field. There is no point re-taking land that has been scorched blank, if it can be avoided. An offense by defensive means keeps the enemy backfilling and reinforcing defenses until exhaustion. Are the Pentagon experts suffering amnesia about failing an attritional struggle in Afghanistan?
@hesthatguy
Жыл бұрын
If Ukraine puts all their good shit in one place it's gonna get blown up, REAL fast. Large masses of troops and equipment are like candy to long range missiles. I think that's the best argument against the "big push" strategy.
@gerardmichaelburnsjr.
Жыл бұрын
Yes. Putin and his lackeys have threatened to use nukes many times already. _Somebody_ in NATO seems to want Putin to win.
@mrfren2115
11 ай бұрын
Pure cope, the Ukrainians aren't winning a battle of attrition without air support attacking a fortified position.
@vinceblanz5917
11 ай бұрын
Yeah nothing really happens in 4 months.
@mspicer3262
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine has been right about their past two offensives. I suspect they have a reason for doing what they are doing. I've read and heard about how badly depleted the Russian military is. The 25th Combined Arms Army wasn't supposed to be ready until late-2024 or so, a brand new army. It was deployed in May to Ukraine, underequipped, undertrained and understaffed. They had no choice. If they're deploying forces like the 25th CAA to Ukraine before they've finished building up, they have nothing left in the tank. With that in mind, Ukraine going to an attritional style is looking to make the entire Russian army begin to collapse kind of makes sense. Death by a thousand cuts.
@purplecat4977
Жыл бұрын
This is what I've been thinking. Not only has Ukraine previously been right, they've come at it from an angle that US strategists totally overlooked. I'm not sure that US strategists are as good at what they do as they like to think they are.
@px1690
Жыл бұрын
American strategists have much more weapons and tactical variations in their toolkit. Ukraine learned the hard way that complex combined arms manouvering is not possible for them due toe lack of training of the mobilized forces. so attrition is their 2nd best option. And it seems to work all be it slower.
@oldgreybeard2507
Жыл бұрын
@@purplecat4977 is the difference between soviet thinking and western thinking?
@MarkDalbey-cv9sb
Жыл бұрын
My degree is in history, I have no strategic or tactical education. For thousands of years wars to varying degrees are about attrition when they last more than a month. Even WWII was more or less a war of attrition. Once Grant changed to a war of attrition, the North won the Civil War in about a year. Ukraine has two goals. One is to expel Russia from Ukraine. The other is to destroy Russia's military so that Russia cannot invade again in a few years. Western strategy is in line with this first goal. Western strategy is not in line with the second goal, it is foreign to them. Ukraine must achieve both goals to first expel Russia from Ukraine and make it impossible for Russia to do it again. Ukraine really isn't fighting for the West. The West can take care of themselves. Ukraine is fighting for all former Soviet Republics that want to lean West. Kazakhstan for example wants to break away from Russia. If Russia does not have the ability to invade it, it probably will.
@sumwun9908
Жыл бұрын
@@MJ-1981Russia isn’t running out of cannon fodder, but I wouldn’t consider poorly trained and equipped drunks as “troops”.
@midomen100
Жыл бұрын
The problem is that Ukraine was forced into this strategy. Not only can they not risk big equipment losses in big offensives. Every concentration of forces are immediatly spotted because of the use of drones. You can not surprise the enemy with bigger attacks. Every surprise on a tactical level is gone.
@ShakesB13r
Жыл бұрын
Sometimes you are forced to take the better alternative. If ukraine wins the war of attrition, they have a shot at winning back the donbas. If they go the ground controll route, russia could pull back enough troops to secure the donbas to become a new border. Also on the logistics level right now, I would say winter is not favoring russians, as it usually punishes those with the worse logistics. The russians cannot afford to fail any of the collums: keep soldiers warm, equipped and fed at the same time. failing any of these logistical challenges and you loose a Batallion or two over a cold winter night. Are they prepared for that? Are their routes open? what if ukraine waits for the wether to have a bad prognosis to reach the 20km line? russia could not get it back in the winter but would have to keep the logistics over unsafe roads throughout the winter. That would be one of the best outcomes for ukraine.
@JosephYahweh
Жыл бұрын
@@ShakesB13r "If ukraine wins the war of attrition", you need to get slapped hard. They're losing it and it's your fault
@islandwills2778
Жыл бұрын
@@ShakesB13r There has been NUMEROUS western news articles that flatly state that russian logistics are good. It should also be noted that russia has traditionally thrived in winter. Something about half there country being a arctic wasteland.
@aaronbaker2186
Жыл бұрын
@@islandwills2778General Winter fights on the side of people defending their homes. Russia took significant losses due to frostbite in the winter of 2022-23. If you do don't have the cold weather gear and the calories to fight in winter you lose men in winter. Russia has shown some improvement in logistics, but we will see how bad their losses are this winter, I doubt they improve much.
@islandwills2778
Жыл бұрын
@@aaronbaker2186 you do realize that last winter was not that long ago. Flatly stated I remember numerous news articles describing the front for Ukraine. Pictures of men in trenches filled with water up to the waist and dead men floating nearby. Disease and weather killing men. If Russia had troubles it was much worse for Ukraine. I hate to inform you but yea Russia not surprisingly has cold weather gear
@markhaus
Жыл бұрын
It seems this war is going to be a long grinding conflict till a breakthrough actually occurs. The west was too slow to provide much needed military hardware to make a quick counteroffensive possible. Discussion of F16 and Gripen transfers should’ve happened long ago for a realistic successful counteroffensive along with a whole suite of other systems like the longer range HIMARS, MBTs, modern artillery and ICVs. Ukraine had an opportunity this year to make a successful counterattack to cut off the land bridge and it seems the collective west dropped the ball. Western (really USA) military leaders can gnash their teeth all they like about not focusing on one axis, but if they want Ukraine to fight like NATO, they need NATO-like equipment and logistics to actually implement these plans in a sane way. Ukraine is smart enough to not fight our wars till every last Ukrainian and that should be respected since it’s their lives and country on the line, not any other western nation. So to the collective west militaries and their provisioners, put up or shut up.
@senatorjosephmccarthy2720
Жыл бұрын
I've been hoping NATO doesn't get attacked by a sloth. As slow as NATO moves NATO won't stand a chance.
@jensholm5759
Жыл бұрын
I dont any slolw in that.
@Nauda999
Жыл бұрын
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visits Sweden on 19 August 2023 at the invitation of Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson. There is talk about Gripens. Zelenskyy leaves. Next day Sweden's puts out official statement that there are no plans to give Gripens to Ukraine.
@cultugarvealgarve7380
Жыл бұрын
The facts tell the west: 1. likes the war of very slow attrition, the longer the better, 2. far more important than a fast Ukrainian victory , 3. incremental late or non deliveries is rather cheap. 4.Western excuses and bla bla about this, to take with grains of salt, not very serious. Shitty advicing/expirience the Ukraine to attackt without air superiority, etc, tells that the west doesn t care 1 shit, thinking the Ukraine was that stupid. A company runned in this way, is asap gone.
@stephenglover1818
Жыл бұрын
it doesn't matter what the West provides Ukraine doesn't have enough manpower
@jensramputh
10 ай бұрын
Ukraine cannot win a war of attrition. Its not logical . They will run out of men. The average soldier in Ukraine is 43 currently.
@blank4067
Жыл бұрын
It's still kinda terrifying for me that this war is gonna last for years.
@SatanicBunny666
Жыл бұрын
Well, considering this war actually started with the taking of Crimea and the conflict in eastern Ukraine, it has de facto been going on for nearly a decade, and might take another such to wrap up unless Russia implodes. Don't get me wrong, I get what you mean and we may be years off from a conclusion, but personally I feel people often miss the fact that Ukraine has been in war for almost 10 years, even though the current, full-out war is more recent.
@Nobody-Nowhere
Жыл бұрын
People keep supporting wars because they love war. They believe in the whole bravery and heroism narrative, instead of the reality of mass murder and pointless deaths.
@blank4067
Жыл бұрын
@@SatanicBunny666 I already know that what is your point?
@MMOStein
Жыл бұрын
Almost all wars last for years despite how much politicians want to cope it will be "over by Chirstmas".
@joeybobbie1
Жыл бұрын
Blame it on NATO! If we would have given Ukraine what they needed, Ukraine would have already Won this War!!
@lucystear6591
Жыл бұрын
the biggest problem i have with this theory is that putin rightly believes that it US aid is only a coinflip away from ending in 2024. putin is def willing to atleast see what happens until than.
@supermanhun
Жыл бұрын
I don't know why everyone ignoring this. Putin said he would play the long game if he has to. Just play def letting Ukraine smash into a wall attritioning themselves and getting bad PR while mobilizing slowly and training troops waiting to see what happens in USA. It's a smart plan the longer the war the stronger Russians hand
@lordcirrhosisofliver
Жыл бұрын
When you mentioned how winning at war is not like winning in a game due to the long term losses even when you win. It reminded me of the winter war. The soviet union "won" the winter war, but they took an absurd amount of loses, gave the Nazi's a major confidence boost, and ensured that the finns would come back for revenge when offered a chance. It might be the prime modern example of a country being worse off after winning a war of aggession then they would have been if they just hadn't.
@freddekl1102
Жыл бұрын
Stalin still ended up taking baltic states after that either way (and still most likely wanted large scale invasion of Europe) so I hope everyone will just realize it's better to support UA to get back 1991 borders no matter what Just don't let Crimea turn into Karelia/Viborg in this example
@lajoyalobos2009
Жыл бұрын
Exactly. Had the invasion never happened, Putin could have died of old age with Crimea in his hands, the Donbas could have been used as a way to slowly bleed Kyiv, and who knows, maybe Russia could have eventually had a political victory in Ukraine rather than a military one. Of course, Putin's invasion went completely FUBAR and there's a real possibility he might see everything slip away from him before he leaves this world. That, and if Russia was going to have some possibly correctable issues in the future, those issues have only been exacerbated to the point of no return very quickly. Russia has been low on young people for at least a decade prior, this war only succeeded in killing scores of them off or chasing them out of the country altogether. A nation of retirees in an already chaotic economy is not a good mixture, but that's what Russia will face for the rest of the 2020's, 30's and 40's and it probably won't get any better.
@samisuhonen9815
Жыл бұрын
And it was a limited victory. Stalin originally gunned for annexing the entirety of Finland. He had to be satisfied with just a fraction of our territory, which was almost completely wasteland. That and a hefty amount of war reparations paid by the Finns. But regardless, it is a far cry from occupying the entire country, placing your own men in charge, deporting the Finns who have education, and establishing us as an oppressed slave population of second class citizen in our own nation. The war was a huge win for us. If we had not fought, or truly lost, we might not be the happy, independent, proud nation we are today. We might be a sad tribe of oppressed ex-soviet slaves, with no recorded culture or education. Because that is what the Russians do when they conquer a nation. They introduce their own language, their own laws, put their own men into positions of power. They kill, deport, or jail any intellectuals of that culture, forcibly causing a brain drain. Educated people, business owners, politicians, artists. They are sent to Siberia, gulags, jailed, or just shot in a ditch.
@Rybc
Жыл бұрын
It would be great if Ruzzia took so many losses in Ukraine that China just said fuck it and took their "traditional territory" back in the Ruzzian north east. The West would just laugh and be like well done China!
@themissingpeace7956
Жыл бұрын
If we compare this conflict to WW2, Ukraine is the Nazis and Russians represent the Soviet Union, not the other way around.
@Atriedis
10 ай бұрын
It's getting harder and harder to take this creator seriously. His analysis are getting more and more nonsensical. How can he say the point of attrition is not to wear down manpower and material. That is literally the definition of the word.
@sheeksipedia
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine hasn't moved the front lines much, but their logistics strikes are an order of magnitude higher than Russia's. I wonder if they have just settled for putting the Russian troops through a cold and hungry winter in the field
@jacqdanieles
Жыл бұрын
If only they could rain a few missiles down on Rostov-on-Don ... the secondaries fireworks show would be spectacular.
@spritemon98
Жыл бұрын
@@jacqdanielesdrones are a good second compared to missiles
@bwise7739
Жыл бұрын
@@spritemon98 Notice the Ukrainians are going after logistics and Putin is expending his drones on terror bombing cities.
@kingoftheduchies752
Жыл бұрын
that's a nice argument senator, why dont you back it up with a source?
@nottodaynsa4782
Жыл бұрын
Lol as long as you fight to the last Ukrainian
@TNOBasedBatov
Жыл бұрын
Putin realizing that irl gameplay is not like HOI4 and you can’t just send over your army to club a country to death supported by the entire western world militarily and financially
@Ar1AnX1x
Жыл бұрын
in modern warfare Technology, Economics, Intelligence and Strategy wins wars, not to mention the military leaders in the west are mostly chosen because of their competence, not because they're loyal to the Autocrat. which is why the West does better Militarily than Russia, and they don't even need Military action anymore, no sane government would want to start even a cold war with EU and U.S.
@dawgwiddaglasses
Жыл бұрын
🤓
@ISmellMopWho
Жыл бұрын
@@dawgwiddaglassesNo one asked for a face reveal.
@xanmontes8715
Жыл бұрын
What's uh... What's HOI4?
@alexdreFalke
Жыл бұрын
@@xanmontes8715 A WW2 Strategy game (lots of lines on maps)
@Daneelro
Жыл бұрын
Attrition is not just troops. In the last few months, Ukraine made a concerted effort to raise hits in the counter-battery fight, in particular using a lot of HIMARS strikes. This is now showing real results: according to the latest video by Perun, based on his own analysis of fresh satellite images, the largest reserve for artillery pieces in Russia is now two-thirds emptied (down from 4,700 to 1,700). Extrapolated to all of Russia's reserves at different sites, that would be a reduction from 12,000 to 4,000 (where it must be noted that not all vehicles in reserve can be restored and some are just cannibalised for parts, in particular barrels). In other words, if Ukraine can keep up the current level of artillery attrition, Russia will run out of its reserves some time next year, and face a whole other problem than shell hunger.
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
Good point. Success in the counter-battery fight also reduces Ukrainian casualties due to Russian artillery.
@jensholm5759
Жыл бұрын
Several lives in the old days. Russia last a lot and equment artillery includes. They has has lost solders - and worse: It take years making good officers.
@corcaighrebel
Жыл бұрын
Very important point, neutralising Russian artillery & missile capacity has been a leading feature, the degradation of Russian capability building to a knock-out punch no doubt with a hope a large part of the Russian line collapses allowing for a general breakout.
@XIIchiron78
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, this. Ukraine is not choosing one strategy or the other - they are doing a hybrid. Each attack is both a real threat with a follow up potential, and a feint with low investment designed to shape Russia's movements and deplete their supplies and manpower. The longer they do this the closer they get to winning. Western supplies continue to trickle in and we are building more capacity and supply lines to deliver them at higher rates. Meanwhile, Russia continues to bleed equipment and experience that they can't really replace. At some point they will reach a critical mass and start breaking through, at which point they can actually commit and pivot into a real push, all without ever risking a major defeat that would leave them vulnerable to a countersurge. Ukrainian grand strategy has honestly been beautiful to behold. They are playing chess to Russias checkers, which come to think of it, is pretty ironic.
@t.r.4496
Жыл бұрын
If Russia is truly talking and having meetings with NK for artillery shells then Russia knows this to. Putin put all his chips in thinking Kyiv would fall in a couple weeks. Bakmut was really a battle to run Russia thru men and ammo. It seems to have worked.
@SylviusTheMad
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine's strategy is fascinating. Their entire operation looks like shaping operations. The shaping never stops. It just keeps creating logistical challenges for Russia, and then it creates new logistical challenges. Rinse and repeat.
@AngryKyivResident
Жыл бұрын
Sad that your brilliant comment has so few likes) world wants Marvel show, army vs army battleground without clean understanding how it works at all... Magic the Gathering strategists)
@redundantideas
Жыл бұрын
I've noticed they seem to really favour things that cost Ru lots of money. It really does seem like they are trying to annoy them out of the war, and if this video is right re mobilisation, it might work.
@adamnevraumont4027
Жыл бұрын
Money is resources. And Moscow doesn't have enough resources. Sinking a 100 million dollar boat isn't about 100 million dollars: Moscow actually cannot replace the boat. Moscow just has 1 fewer boats. Repeat for infantry, bombers, tanks, even artillery. Ukraine, if it can manage the current level of western support, can sustain current war levels for decades.
@jacobfrost2131
Жыл бұрын
M.A.N.P.O.W.E.R.@@adamnevraumont4027
@schopenhauer5427
11 ай бұрын
Sure 😂
@Fede_uyz
Жыл бұрын
I believe theres a bigger issue: Zelensky doesnt want to signal that ANY of Ukraine is 'less important' or that any of Ukraine should 'be left behind' while they sort other stuff out. So to avoid this, Ukraine needs to fight on the whole front line so people from all the occupied areas can have news, videos, photos of Ukranian troops fighting for their homes too.
@theultimatereductionist7592
Жыл бұрын
President & General Zelensky is a hero!
@senatorjosephmccarthy2720
Жыл бұрын
Certainly. Ukraine must maintain the entire front line, showing all of the land will be retaken.
@richardparadox163
Жыл бұрын
Indeed. I feel like he kind of hints at when he talks about what would happen if Ukraine succeeds at severing the land bridge with a massive offensive. You’re left in a “so now what” scenario with the Russians still occupying Crimea and the Donbass. And while it makes it easier to retake Crimea by severing logistics, it’s still not going to be a cake walk, especially because Western support for retaking Crimea is kind of iffy and the Russians will be even more entrenched in the Donbass and incentivized to hold on to it for political reasons, and you end up having to fight an attritional war anyway except the Russians are in a better defensive position, and risk the West pulling out before you can retake it. Best case you end up with a negotiated settlement that involves losing Crimea and parts of the Donbass. In this case it makes more sense to soften the Russians up across the line as much as possible beforehand and weakening their resolve at home *before* the breakthrough. Increases the chance of collapse on the lines and/or at home and retaking the whole of Ukraine.
@bwise7739
Жыл бұрын
@@richardparadox163 Donbass is going to be problematic to retake unless Russia collapses. Crimea is Putin’s big achievement so it’s not clear what he’s going to do when Crimea is directly threatened (tactical nukes at the choke points are possible if he’s desperate). The problem is that not only is his logistics there are close to being strangled but since Russia blew up the dam the water supply has be cut off (great move Russia) which means little irrigation or drinking water. OTOH there are only very narrow access points for Ukraine to invade but they can’t leave Crimea in Russian hands or it’s just a matter of time before they’re attacked again.
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
@@bwise7739 In addition, the Russian's are seeing that maintaining a fleet at Sevastopol is increasingly difficult. They need to establish a much larger and probably impractical radius of control and defense around that port to operate their fleet out of that facility. Ukraine might be able to make Sevastopol less relevant to the Russian navy.
@Deamon93IT
Жыл бұрын
I suspect it is a mix of factors: Ukraine may have wanted to go all the way to Azov, but the prepared Surovikin line and the lack of air/naval superiority (two great enablers in the US toolkit and more broadly in NATO's doctrine) forced them to change. At the same time, betting on Putin not being willing and/or able to mobilize more may pay off, assuming of course they have enough long range fire at their disposal (be it artillery or MLRS). I guess we shall see how things develop in the coming weeks, but one thing is certain: Russian logistics along the land bridge will be quite strained without being able to use the rail (as it is in range of HIMARS and even the long range 155/52s)
@divumque
Жыл бұрын
It is about the time for GLSDBs to appear in Ukraine.
@thisherehandleIdospout
Жыл бұрын
Wait, so even with the current front lines, the main rail lines across the land bridge are comfortably within HIMARS range? Because that's obviously a big deal, if that's already true, given how much Russia relies on its rail network for, like... everything O.o
@Deamon93IT
Жыл бұрын
@@thisherehandleIdospout the current railhead for the Russians is Melitopol, which is already within 80 km from the frontlines. If either the Ukrainians manage to get more breathing room for HIMARS or they get longer range stuff (see ATACMS et al) they should be able to cause issues to the Russians
@Frank--Lee
Жыл бұрын
@@Deamon93IT I've been thinking that the crucial railhead was Tokmak
@Deamon93IT
Жыл бұрын
@@Frank--Lee at this point it seems too close on the frontline to be the one, although could be wrong of course.
@connormclernon26
Жыл бұрын
I can only hope that Ukraine is right.
@bilboriches7216
Жыл бұрын
@@rphb5870 Well, Ukraine was always right thus far. Dont see anything changing. We just have to wait till Ukraine outsmarts russia again.
@braincell4536
Жыл бұрын
@@rphb5870 They can sure make Russia bleed until it collapses. I doubt Ukraine will win a war where it retakes all its borders. But they can atleast make Russia bleed into a 4th world country. Already they destroyed Russia's prestige and its paper tiger army.
@xanmontes8715
Жыл бұрын
@@davethebaronhello 112 (it's my countries equivalent of 911)? Yeah I'd like to report a fuckin' warcrime. You can patch me in to the Hague if you want.
@kitchenersown
Жыл бұрын
@@davethebaron and if 9 trillion russian tanks were destroyed and the russian are dumb and stupid ukraine would've reached melitopol at the very least...
@stargazer-elite
Жыл бұрын
@@iMalyshkashut up with your whataboutisam
@dimushka383
Жыл бұрын
It was funny for me to listen in the video and read in the comments about the hope of Ukraine in a war of attrition. Just one fact, think about it. Without any propaganda, just a fact that is easily verified. 1) Russia is still in peacetime mode and has only had one PARTIAL mobilization in 2022. 2) Ukraine, monthly mobilizations according to the general mobilization announced by Zelinsky. + From August 2023, the mentally ill, chronically ill and HIV-infected are also eligible for conscription. + Since September of this year, the age limit for those mobilized has been raised to 65 years (life expectancy in Ukraine is 68 years). Also, all female doctors and other necessary specialties are subject to mobilization; everyone must join the reserve. This, in my opinion, speaks very well about the losses of both sides and the prospects for a long war of attrition.
@XIIchiron78
Жыл бұрын
Something important to note: it is not necessarily one strategy or the other. The element of timing is important also. Ukraine seems to be engaging in a hybrid attritional strategy, where each attack is both its own threat with a follow up potential, and also a feint intended to shape Russia's movement and deplete their resources and manpower. This is a good strategy _if Ukraine believes they will be stronger in the future, or Russia weaker._ Both of which seem likely. The longer they buy time, the more western supplies trickle in and the more capacity and supply chains the west is able to build up to deliver supplies at _higher rates_ in the future. In other words, rather than try to force a push that could collapse their entire defense if they take too many losses, they can continue the current status quo until an opportunity presents itself or a critical mass is reached, and then pivot. Conveniently, such an opportunity has just come to fruition around Robotyne. So we will see how they respond.
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
Bla, bla.....
@hydrolifetech7911
Жыл бұрын
@@tokyo.pekingwhy aren't at the front line comrade Ivan?
@th3highwayman
Жыл бұрын
This would make sense if Ukraine wasn’t eating casualties like it has been since the offensive started.
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
@@hydrolifetech7911 Where are your arguments, dummy ?
@XIIchiron78
Жыл бұрын
@@th3highwayman I haven't seen any good numbers for Ukrainian losses but that's true, such a strategy only makes sense if it is helping conserve manpower and resources compared to making a larger push. I didn't think they had been taking very severe losses in general, but I don't really know.
@rickgarcia4344
Жыл бұрын
Excellent analysis. This is an absolute Attritional War. Like Vietnam & Afghanistan, the great Military Powers get tired and bog down. The Ukrainians have no choice but to fight and defend on their own terms and not on Nato's.
@gregtriplex5878
Жыл бұрын
but the distance is different. russia is soo close, logistic range is not too far for long term war
@raevj
Жыл бұрын
That is fine, but the US citizens are funding to actually run the Ukrainian government & even paying Ukrainian retirement pensions while the U.S. is literally invaded by over 7 Million illegals thus far under just Biden. We are being overrun by young men from adversarial countries like Iran, Russia, & China, & all Biden sees is Ukraine….Biden should run just Ukraine, not the US.
@karmo1629
Жыл бұрын
@@gregtriplex5878well, take out the M14 and the bridge and crimea and kherson oblast are done for anyway, no matter how close russia is. You cant effectively transport an armys worth of supplied across unpaved roads or fields.
@gregtriplex5878
Жыл бұрын
@@karmo1629 well good luck for that
@thexalon
Жыл бұрын
I've always thought the WWII analogies were misplaced in the Russia-Ukraine War. The trend seemed a lot more like WWI: More infantry fighting than armored vehicles (which slows everything down to foot pace), trench warfare and static defense positions, lots of artillery, minimal air attack capabilities but lots of air recon, etc. In addition, there's a road problem in a lot of this territory. Which means large-scale attacks aren't a winning move.
@ChucksSEADnDEAD
Жыл бұрын
But the infantry is driven to the action in IFVs and uparmored vehicles like MRAPs. Instead of foot pace charges, armor blitzes in to drop troops and gets out of dodge to avoid becoming an ATGM magnet.
@thexalon
Жыл бұрын
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD How much are they, though? (1) Early on, Ukraine often didn't have IFVs or MRAPs, or the fuel to move them. (2) A lot of the places that fighting is heavy, roads are unusable either because they're too obvious a target or because they weren't paved to begin with or shelled too much, and dirt + water = impassable mud. It sure looks to me like defensive reinforcements can move quickly well behind the lines, but once you get close in you have to walk there. And it's fast-moving armor that allows WWII-style fighting to work. If you don't have that, you're back to WWI tactics.
@ChucksSEADnDEAD
Жыл бұрын
@@thexalon WWI tactics look insane by today's standards. Basically advancing on foot as artillery barrages also move forward ahead of you. Getting a battle taxi to drive you close enough to a trench to the point that you can use rifle fire and the enemy can't drop artillery on you without also hitting their own troops is space-age stuff compared to WWI. Early on, Ukraine was on a defensive posture so they weren't raiding that many trenches.
@santiagogarza8121
Жыл бұрын
More the Crimean war (19th century) I'd ay
@StonedSpagooter
Жыл бұрын
Russia is literally shelling them into shreds dude
@dalehartley2821
Жыл бұрын
In WWII, it took months to break through the dense fortifications after D-Day, followed by fairly rapid progress through the remainder of France.
@johnryan6003
Жыл бұрын
And Allie’s had air superiority.
@ingamgoduka57
Жыл бұрын
😂😂😂Allies had numbers & inferior technology. But still the same today but difference is Russia has a scorched earth button unlike the Nazi Germany.
@privacyvalued4134
Жыл бұрын
@@ingamgoduka57 Russia itself has had massive amounts of land that they can literally burn in the face of an invading force. It's one of the major reasons Russia still exists as a nation. Their historical MO is to just retreat and burn everything, leaving a devastated _frozen_ wasteland for the invader to deal with. It's largely how they defeated both Napoleon and Germany. Also, Russian nukes may or may not function - the vast majority are over 50 years old and, while Russia has had superior rocket building expertise in the past, they might not have the ability to maintain them. Given the Russian hardware seen in the war in Ukraine, there's a good chance that those nukes won't actually launch and will instead blow up in their faces.
@psychohist
Жыл бұрын
@@privacyvalued4134 There's a good chance the nukes won't launch. There's very little chance they will "blow up in their faces". Nukes don't work like conventional explosives.
@ingamgoduka57
Жыл бұрын
😂😂😂😂If their nukes were not working don't you think they would be nuclear waste land by now after all the hate their getting from other Europe countries after humiliating western wonder weapons?@@privacyvalued4134
@polloloco911
Жыл бұрын
All I learned from this video is my boy wants Ukrainian to die. All ifs and buts, no really logic from anything he mentioned 😅
@luigiaqua2263
Жыл бұрын
It reminds of ww1, as British and Germans tried to finalise the war by wearing out the enemy’s capacity of defence. It’s nearely unknown that the Brits were somehow shocked by German armistice, as the Brits didn’t have any left capacity for supporting their troops nor getting enough supplies to Great Britain, due to the enormous losses of ships by Uboots and American troops and supplies used too much of transport capacity. But German troops were morally destroyed, starved and bad supplied with ammo and all necessary goods. Same situation this year for Russian soldiers in Ukraine, badly supported, lack of nutrition, ammo and so on. Similar is also the lack of supervision due to very few NCOs in Russian army, in German Atmy of 1918 the lack of experience of officers due to very high death toll on the officers of 1914. It is possible that in next winter the Russian front collapses, not whilst the lack of troops or armoury, but of bad morale. Right now in Zaporishia the best Russian units get devastated, could be their end. And what’s next? New conscripts won’t make it, probably the experienced officers won’t get close to fight zone, leaving their troops headless.
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine needs to target the back shooters in the second line of defense. The Russians in front are often ready to lay down arms.
@johnboie4964
Жыл бұрын
Interesting analysis, thank you! 🍺
@luigiaqua2263
Жыл бұрын
@@timtrewyn453 Think it’s better just to let them do their task, destroying the morale of Russians. Best enemy of Russia is itself.
@dentroy7926
Жыл бұрын
Your crazy
@stephenhall3515
Жыл бұрын
Your comments about WW1 do not correspond to facts. My grandfather (HLI 1915 to 1919) often commented that by the time the French army had re-formed in early 1917, British Commonwealth and French forces were in a good enough condition to push the Germans back (even though some trench warfare was static due to Dutch refusal to cooperate) across a very wide area. Aside from the main river valley battles Anglo-French innovations in 'special warfare' damaged the German navy and air force without recovery. Thus the N.American convoys were under reduced threat and when the USA belatedly entered the war the main advantage was equipment as US troops on the western front were something of a liability until trained up. Even when the 1917 Russian Revolution freed up seasoned German troops it made little difference to efficacy in the field because of artillery and tank strength being with the allies as well as rapid air and sea developments against submarines and supply ships. The High Seas Fleet had been contained since 1916 after the Battle of Jutland. The German 'Siege of Paris' of 1918 had little effect as Allied troops closed in behind the German forces and the war in western Europe had essentially been over for some time. German troops fought on but a pattern of being eager to surrender to Allied forces had become common. The notion of "attrition as attack" failed and was not in the nature of the Germans whose younger officers had their minds on a new Germany.
@Strix2031
11 ай бұрын
Attrition is ridiculous Russia has double Ukraine's population and the west is every year more and more turning to a euroscheptic right-wing wich has no interest in acttually helping Ukraine. I expect in the next 1-2 years the support for the ukraine within the EU will collapse. Ukraine's existance is depending entirely on foreign backing,it has no actual military industry most of it having been dismantled with the fall of the USSR or beeing in combat zones in the Dombass, unlike Russia wich still has a lot of soviet remnants and full control of its territory. And like,Putin will win no matter what most russians are pro-war
@JMurph2015
Жыл бұрын
I think a major point missing here is that Ukraine is working quite actively to undermine the flow of Russian materiel. At the current loss rates, it's possible that Ukraine will actually be able to achieve artillery numerical superiority. Russia can only pump out so many of those barrels and shells. The arrival of GLSDB (already committed), ATACMS (apparently close), and Taurus (apparently close) will only make this strategy of hunting every piece of valuable Russian kit in Ukraine more and more effective. Russia might be able to mobilize another 300,000 troops, but if they have no heavy equipment, they'll be walking into a bloodbath.
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
You're right. And Ukraine absolutely has to continue to do this or accept territorial loss.
@mockier
Жыл бұрын
Yes. One with cluster shells to make up for any man power advantage. Hope we see the war end before then.
@johnryan6003
Жыл бұрын
Untrained troops are not that much help, either.
@danielstarnes7354
Жыл бұрын
You are right, except for GLSDB. these were all the hype 7 months ago and it's been crickets ever since. Meanwhile USA was to be x-raying the rockets which was to take months. I want to see these destroying Ruzzian capability, but am afraid US has reneged on sending them.
@34ccsn
Жыл бұрын
Russia has a 4 to 1 artillery advantage against ALL OF NATO COMBINED and you think ukraine will attrit that away before they lose? There is no way for ukraine to win a war of attrition.
@stepup898
Жыл бұрын
Russia will mobilise and is mobilising piecemeal so they don’t actually have to announce one, they are already making it highly difficult for those who have served to actually go back/survive in civilian life by starving them of money through highly inefficient and intentionally inefficient bureaucracy, driving them back to sign another contract.
@Kevlar_soul
Жыл бұрын
Never under estimate the simple strategy of continuing to fight indefinitely until other side simply gets tired and leaves. You can lose all your territory, armor, artillery and lose every major battle. But if you keep fighting and causing consistent casualties to the enemy eventually they will lose the will to fight.
@C4Vendetta
Жыл бұрын
Prime example, Afghanistan
@stormythelowcountrykitty7147
Жыл бұрын
Vietnam
@kitchenersown
Жыл бұрын
@@C4Vendetta In those war the American/Soviets won the conventional war. They lost when it came to ruling and defeating the guerilla. Ukraine is not like that at all, the war is conventional and not a guerilla one.
@i-love-space390
Жыл бұрын
The thing is, RUSSIA is losing every battle so far.
@Iamkcs2c
Жыл бұрын
George Washington was 3-9-1 against the British. He doesn't appear to have consciously fought a "All I have to do is keep army in the field long enough" strategy. He kept trying to win battles, largely failed, and picked himself and the continental army back up again after. That always impressed me, second only to how he broke the nascent machinations of the army towards a military coup over poor oay and supply during the lull after Yorktown and before the treaty of paris. He assembled his officers, started by reading yet another letter from the continental congress promising to fix things (which was not working). In the middle of his speech, he stopped, put on the glasses that he never wore in public, and told the men that not only had he grown poor, he had grown old in the service of his country. His men broke down crying, and the uprising against the political leadership was stopped because it was clear that he did not want them to continue.
@rubenramirez4322
11 ай бұрын
Ukraine is not the problem, the problem is the West, NATO, and the United States. We are not stupid, we know what's up.
@kekistanimememan170
10 ай бұрын
Ukraine was invaded by Russia not NATO.
@pkre707
Жыл бұрын
I can help but feeling like this is painting a target around a dot. Time and time again I’ve seen people rationalize what they see on the ground as part of some Ukrainian 4D chess. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t, but I’m not holding my breath. Wars of attrition are incredibly hard to predict and understand from the outside.
@DanishCamp
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine wants to go to the sea of Azov but they cannot risk the men. Therefore they poke and prope to fight their way through the defense lines to make a safe route for the large offensive armies to go through. Russia clearly sees where the push is happening therefore Ukraine has to do distrations at Kherson and Bakmut that can draw Russian forces away from the push. If they dont they risk a huge morale defeat in loosing Bakmut or otherwise free passage behind the defense lines over the dnipr river. Thus it is the safe but slow plan. Problem is winter because then Russia can build new defenses and they will have to start over in the spring. We'll just have to see what happens.
@DanishCamp
Жыл бұрын
F-16s will be in Ukraine in spring btw
@rushyscoper1651
Жыл бұрын
looking at the south, russian position is already not realistically maintainable, so u don't have to do a lot of rationalizing of possible Ukrainian 4d chess. the question is more who will break first russia logistic/will or west support and after that what to do with the other front?
@alejandrolim8615
Жыл бұрын
Because Ukraine has a 133 and 1/3% chance of winning at sacrifice against Putin. Good reference. War is indeed a gigantic math problem. Thank Lanchester for that.
@Gametheory101
Жыл бұрын
But what happens if you add Alexander Lukashenko in the mix?
@alchemist_x79
Жыл бұрын
Your chances of winning DRASTIC GO DOWN.
@senatorjosephmccarthy2720
Жыл бұрын
@@Gametheory101 Then you add Poland. And all the countries presently captured by russ.
@DoloresJNurss
Жыл бұрын
A war ends when one side seizes most of the morale of the other side. Traditionally, this is done primarily by seizing land and/or killing the opposition, which has devastating impact on the opposition's morale, but it is not strictly required. So both the "pluckiness" and "number" arguments have some validity. Also, one of the biggest, drippiest aspects of the Fog of War is that we don't actually have all the numbers that we need to calculate the victor clearly. For instance, the number of soldiers available isn't necessarily the same as the number of soldiers fit to fight, nor do we know the range of capabilities of those fighting. Same goes for equipment. How much does having more tanks matter if the other side has better tanks? How much of an advantage is a warehouse full of antique ordinance that's more likely to blow up in the barrel or not blow up at all, than the other side's fewer but newer ammunition? Manufacturing capabilities also matter. A country under embargo can't manufacture as much as a country flooded with aid by most of the industrialized world. If Russia has to turn to nations like Iran and North Korea for aid, you know they're in trouble. And then there's innovation. Russia has systematically stunted imaginations and whittled away education for generations, to create a docile, apolitical populace. What innovative and technically-savvy people they did have fled by the thousands at the first mobilization--the most acute brain-drain in history. Furthermore, all generals who were too good at their job have been weeded out for decades as possible threats to the Putin regime. This makes them far less adaptable. Dinosaurs may have been bigger, but the more adaptable mammals survived them. And Ukraine is innovative. Their invention of seababies is a real game-changer. And Russia can't keep up or adequately counter their mastery of air drones. So yes, numbers do matter. But equations with important numbers left out are garbage.
@noctisilva6457
Жыл бұрын
As for the numbers of personnel, AFU has not recruited abroad yet. There is a voluntary division, but UA never asked for personnel. I am sure there are many people in Europe or abroad, willing to help or even actively fight against RU. I'm no good with guns, but can drive anything on wheels. Would be happy to sign up if asked. And I think with me, many others.
@Ozzies
Жыл бұрын
@@noctisilva6457 - Quite true. I'm from Australia and have been planning on going over for some 6 months. Passport and such is ready, I'm just waiting for the men running things to allow me to go -- but truth be told they prefer not to have civs volunteer, due to the training that needs to be done, but for me, my mates put in a good word and so whenever those running it say the word and allow me to go volunteer -- I'll be off. I know a couple blokes who volunteer in driving trucks and civilian vehicles that pick up the injured soldiers in the frontline. And for every town and city that gets recaptured, the 2 of them are always asked to help with getting the civilian population to leave the towns/city(s) before and and after the fighting begins or ground lost) And that is the Infantry..apparently the artillery is constant, no matter what. Anyway mate, if you do go over, just be careful, obviously lol. But yeah, give us a tingle here if you go! I'll come say his 👍🏻
@Ozzies
Жыл бұрын
@DoloresJNurss Very well said my friend. Great post.
@DoloresJNurss
Жыл бұрын
@@Ozzies I salute your courage and integrity. May you live to tell your grandchildren about it!
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
@@DoloresJNurss I laugh at your words. Have you seen the Maps ? Have you read about "counter offensive' ? They are proofs that you are wrong. After months of trying ukros lost over 50.000 soldiers and did not move more then 2-3 km. Therefore, Rossia took teritory, Rossia took a power.
@cherowa
Жыл бұрын
Some truth, but more wishful thinking, Also, the narrative comes from, and with a divided mind...Mr. Spaniel enjoys ideological speculation. Bon appetit!
@smokeydops
Жыл бұрын
My baseline going into this is that Kiev tried a spearhead without air superiority to see how it would go, as they were genuinely advised to do. It did not go as planned, so they have decided to wait for F-16s to be ready in force before attempting that again. When they DO make another go at it with more significant air assets, they are aware that Russia will be extremely politically and militarily motivated to shoot down as many Western jets as possible, which increases the risk of performing such a maneuver in force without spending time to break down air defenses in the areas supposed for a spearhead attack. In the mean time, they have only what other strategies and opportunities have worked before. Attrition has worked before; it has put the heat on Moscow and raised strife inside Russia....
@F.R.E.D.D2986
Жыл бұрын
Eh, j wouldn't say that. F--16 can shoot a missile from Kharkiv an hit something in Donetsk.
@TouringWolf42
Жыл бұрын
Russia will definitely sacrifice their jets to shoot down even a single F-16, the F-16s Ukraine is getting are outdated and around the same as an SU-30. Which isn't bad, but not the best. So shooting down one isn't really huge from a MILITARY point of view, but politically of course it's a different story.
@Klote3241
Жыл бұрын
@@TouringWolf42 outdated? not really. the F16 Ukraine is getting is the A/B (MLU) Block 20. (Netherlands has around 40 of those) That update is equal to F-16C/D Block 50 from 1997... Any way those are still serious weapons packages and Russia doesn't have much better then SU-30/SU-37 which are comparable planes. SU-57 is to valuable they wont use that they cant build new ones if they lose them.
@corcaighrebel
Жыл бұрын
Ants eating an elephant (or bear) piece by piece.
@Klote3241
Жыл бұрын
@@hydraulixx Lol no. an update to a plane defacto makes it not outdated. the frame might be old but the tech going into that jet flat out isnt. The BLOCK 20 update is equal to that of the BLOCK 50 which will have a service life up til 2031. To call that outdated doesn't show that you know what you are talking about.
@grrkaa8450
Жыл бұрын
Melitopol is the key. After Melitopol everything will fall in place. One simply can't overestimate the importance of Melitopol, as soon as Ukraine gains control over this city, the war is basically over. They can isolate an overwhelmingly big chunk of Russias ammo, ordinance, manpower and vehicles from the motherland in Kherson region and on Crimea. Ukrain could blow the Kerch bridge and any russian ferry dock to pieces and every russian soldier has to wonder how the hell he'll get home even IF he would decide to run after the liberation of Melitopol. After choking the western half of Russias force to death Ukraine can free up tons of men, vehicles and weapons systems to conventionally shoot the russians and collaborateurs by conventional means or count on the evildoer's fear of having to face just that which could lead them to surrender or run over the eastern border. Maybe even boosted with F16 and Taurus support.
@guitarhausdoesntknowwhatac3285
Жыл бұрын
Melitopol would be great, but Tokamak is arguably better; it's got less defenses, can be siezed more easily and puts the berdunsk highway into artillery range.
@nottodaynsa4782
Жыл бұрын
The delusions of nafo freaks. How many more dead ukranians do you need to satisfy that takeover? 10k? 15k?
@karlschmid1855
Жыл бұрын
Dream on Buddy.
@guitarhausdoesntknowwhatac3285
Жыл бұрын
@@karlschmid1855 It's pretty reasonable; If russia can't ensure steady supplies to Kherson and Crimea then their choices are to either let the local forces get sieged into submission or withdraw, and if they can't hold those two Oblasts then there is no point in bleeding for Zaporizhian. Hell It might not even be worth it to prop up Donetsk and Luhansk.
@anadrol9934
Жыл бұрын
It's exactly what I think, once Melitopol is liberated, Crimea and the Western part of Ukraine can't be supplied anymore and will be basically lost to Russians.
@noyopacific
Жыл бұрын
In the comparison of strengths, physical size is counted as a strength. I would not necessarily count it this way for defensive purposes. The greater size of Russia gives it longer borders and more area that would need to be defended if one of their neighbors decided it was a good time to resolve "historic boundary disputes." Something to consider perhaps. Thanks for the video William ! P.S: speaking of wars of attrition, I recall that even when the British Empire was near it's mightiest, a ragtag band of rebels that lost nearly every battle with the Brits was able to convince them to eventually give up and retreat from it's former American colonies .
@Dommifax
Жыл бұрын
Britain's Vietnam
@someoneinoffensive
Жыл бұрын
Not its mightiest in 1776 and the rag tag rebels had a tremendous (bankruptingly so) amount of help from the French, including professional military assistance. Hopefully that's a parallel to the current situation and NATO steps up its support.
@IconoclastX
Жыл бұрын
nobody is attacking Russia buddy. I know you may dream of that and more suffering but that isn't going to happen
@UGNAvalon
Жыл бұрын
@rcuhylicstdcothereviewdude870 33 China nearly went to war with USSR over border disputes, Chechnya & Georgia both got territory annexed by Russia. If Russia turns into a house of cards, a lot of groups might start calling for independence.
@SianaGearz
Жыл бұрын
I don't think Russia has any intention to defend its long border no matter what happens there. After all you can't even conceptualise that border from a Moscow window, much less from a bunker periscope.
@LazyPictures
11 ай бұрын
That's all intresting and so on but while theorizing forget about the F elephant in the room - The NATO, which IS the Russian major concern. Moreover it is the point where full scale war started. So Russia obviously keeps mobilization in resever for a NATO involvement. It's ridiculuos to think that 150 million people country has as little to no reserves to match Ukraine army. It's as ridiculous as concerns that loosing the war is better that some mobilization. Purin will not outlive defeat in Ukraine. Everybody knows that. So month have passed since this video and Ukraine failed their offensive while Russia prepares a counteroffensive - reversing Kharkiv 2022.
@tonyd.7088
Жыл бұрын
Just a thought- nobody CHOOSES attrition. You are just forced by recognizing you don't have the capability for a decisive victory.
@jondoe6926
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, people just keep trying to fool themselves. Ukraine's counteroffensive failed. Now it's attrition and it'll be slow and take years.
@alexleong7041
Жыл бұрын
What happen - could they not replicate the sinking of the Moskva a few more times ?
@GusOfTheDorks
Жыл бұрын
@@alexleong7041Why would they bother? Its a ground war.
@rushyscoper1651
Жыл бұрын
that stupid, attrition of logistic is how u get decisive win. wars are logistic. specially modern wars, if u don't understand that then u don't understand war.
@rushyscoper1651
Жыл бұрын
how does something fail if its never started or still on going? if anything they kinda lied about ever doing a counteroffensive at least in the way that people thought it gonna be, because public often dislike long war. maybe it failed people expectation, but like tactical failure? it look successful so far, its just not the tactics that people expected at first. @@jondoe6926
@markallen4514
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for a great perspective on the Ukraine situation. As I watched your video I couldn’t help but think about two things that you didn’t mention directly. The first is that to win a war of attrition, you don’t need to convince the “country.” You need to convince the decision makers. Ukraine has spent the last year fighting to control or destroy (albeit mostly destroy) things of value to the Russia military and oligarchs. The Black Sea fleet is severely degraded, the valuable assets in the Donbass can’t be used effectively and infrastructure is being destroyed. I suspect the loss of hard to replace militarily hardware weighs on the Russian generals far more than any other factor. The Russo-Japanese War ended with a change is Tsars but also the loss of the Pacific fleet. While that war is now considered one sided, in truth, personnel losses were about even. Russia was willing to accept a 1:1 loss ratio but not the loss of ships. The generals were willing to continue. The admirals were not. Ukraine is looking to get the admirals to lobby for a peace deal that saves the fleet. Same with the army. Putin doesn’t care nearly as much as his generals about the destruction of weapons systems. The military is interested primarily in their internal power. Ukraine doesn’t need to convince Russians generally. It needs to convince a few people at the top. The second point is that in order to win you need to survive. As long as Ukraine has an effective military and minimal EU support, it can hold out indefinitely and will continue to be able to impact Russia regardless of where an armistice line is drawn. I think the Ukrainians are mainly interested in survival. In a long run, an economically and militarily successful Ukraine will be fatal to Russian interests. I think that is the grand strategy.
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
Are you BLIND ?
@MikiSuzuki2000
Жыл бұрын
Very interesting, thanks
@515coldfire
Жыл бұрын
this is waste of analysis. to think that ukrainians have a fighting chance against a nuke country just blows my mind. anyone who thinks they can win by having a clown president in ukraine vs a genius president of russia just blows my mind.
@Call-me-James
Жыл бұрын
Ukrainians are smart. They know what they are doing. Our focus should be on listening to them and doing everything we can to give them what they need.
@beautifulworld6573
Жыл бұрын
to do what? to regain a territory where people were getting killed daily by their own Ukrainian people?
@scottsmith7051
Жыл бұрын
Amen
@stinkypete891
Жыл бұрын
Yeah ok 💙💩💛
@6000.
Жыл бұрын
@@stinkypete891blud wants attention, your comments on other videos are such obvious bait, there’s no way you’re this stupid on purpose “Ukraine took back 6,000 kilometers of territory in Kharkiv in a month but Russia annexed 10,600 in Donbas”
@obtuseguru7259
Жыл бұрын
We should increase the taxes of people people in favor of assisting ukraine militarily so we are able to fund it.
@guillermomartinmonge
Жыл бұрын
William Spaniel, this is so ridiculous it would be funny, if not so cruel to the Ukranians, who are the US pawns, sacrificial lambs for the gloated American politics. US gloats about debilitating Russia's forces without a single boot at the war. If this does not appear to you as Psicopahic, you should take a view in the mirror about who you are, please do.
@gustavolrcoelho
Жыл бұрын
HI William, I don't know how long you produce these in advance, but yesterday Putin stated that Russia got around 300 thousand "volunteers" to join the war, but didn't disclose any other information. Also, I disagree with you that the offensive has failed thus far. The main goal of this offensive is to suffocate Crimea, not just the land bridge. Cutting the land access is one of the steps, but that won't solve the naval base and brigde problem. As you stated in the video, 20km is enough to reach all the roads that lead to Crimea, cutting the supply through that route without having to necessarily control that territory, but you miss the point that by attacking the naval base and destroying the ship and submarine yesterday, as well as the air defense systems that were stationed in Crimea, Ukraine has rendered the situation insustainable to Russia. In the following days/weeks, you'll see an ever increasing number of attacks on Crimea and Sevastopol, and even on the bridge to destroy or at least make it inoperable, then after that objective is secured, Ukraine will push for the land gap. Sacrificing personnel and material to advance the Surovikin Line while the other accesses of Crimea still stand is a waste. This approach justifies the slow progress and spread of the UA, as well as the drone attacks on Russian soil, because their goal is to keep russian soldiers and antiair equipment outside of Crimea, making it easier to attack and raid. This week's attacks were shaping bombings to weaken the desense on the peninsula to enable stormshadow attacks on the bridge and frankly, there's nothing Russia can do to stop Ukraine at this moment on this regard. One last note is that these past seven days, Ukraine has surpassed the first line and reached the second line of defense near Verbove and Novoprokopivka and most likely by the end of the month they should have at least captured it.
@diogorodrigues747
Жыл бұрын
*HI William, I don't know how long you produce these in advance, but yesterday Putin stated that Russia got around 300 thousand "volunteers" to join the war, but didn't disclose any other information.* He can say whatever he wants, it doesn't mean it's true.
@Llortnerof
Жыл бұрын
@@diogorodrigues747 Sure, but the question here is what parts of that are lies, not whether the whole is.
@MrLeadb1
Жыл бұрын
You do realise that Russia had no problem supplying Crimea's needs for years before the bridge was built.
@diogorodrigues747
Жыл бұрын
@@MrLeadb1 The conditions back then were different though.
@diogorodrigues747
Жыл бұрын
@@Llortnerof That's true.
@romantoporkov2652
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for the analysis. Let me offer a bit of perspective as someone who is actually in Russia right now. I did leave the country to stop feeding the regime about 1.5 years ago, but popped back in for a few weeks to visit some relatives. Personally, I believe there is a factor you're not considering. I do agree that the mobilization was a highly unpopular move and the government will be hesitant to repeat it any time before the presidential election. The thought of combining another mobilization with a round of conscription appears bizarre to me, as there's simply not enough administrative resource to pull that off. However, the mobilization and conscription are not the only sources of manpower. Everywhere I go in my hometown, there are billboards promoting the "contractual military service" - basically, going to war for a monetary compensation. And I did see people actually lining up for the possibility. You see, the prospect of risking life and limb for like $2k a month sounds crazy to a 1st world country citizen, but in Russia, it's more than many people can earn in a year. Throw in the guaranteed compensations for trauma and/or death (paid out to the family of the deceased), bonuses for completing combat objectives etc - and it does start to sound very appealing for a big chunk of male population. You may say "but Russia is under sanctions and has no money to pay these people", and I would argue that this is simply untrue. From what I see, coming back home after the war was raging for 1.5 years - nothing has really changed. It's like the sanctions aren't even there. So my bet is that the Russian government will try and accumulate some guns for hire (be it from Cuba or just its own poor population) to try and deliver some sort of military success before the presidential elections. Then, if it's still relevant, a second mobilization may ensue, but only after the God-Emperor is in his seat for 6 more years.
@ralphsto.domingo9297
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for providing your perspective! Is the sentiment in Russia one that wants to see the conflict continue for years on end?
@romantoporkov2652
Жыл бұрын
@@ralphsto.domingo9297 actually, it feels accepted as a new normal by now. Like "yep, there's war, can't do anything about it, let's wait and maybe it goes away" Russian character is typically more about perseverance than action to change - people tend to adapt to whatever conditions are imposed on them. I see no realistic scenario in which people will revolt against the regime. I have to clarify though, that Russia is an immensely big place. One cannot really talk about the overall sentiment. I'm writing this from the safety of my home, 4 thousand kilometers away from the front lines. It is natural to treat the war as a distant inconvenience here rather than something on your doorstep. Perhaps, people living closer to Ukraine, looking up to the sky for drones would not agree with me in the slightest.
@johnny_eth
11 ай бұрын
Why does he even care about the elections ? It's all rigged. He's going to get 80% of the vote. Any viable opposition would be thrown in the same dungeon as Navalny, evne though they would neve rget the votes.
@idealicfool
Жыл бұрын
William Spaniel: war is a gigantic math problem. My father, a former logistician in the Royal Australian Navy: This man is speaking my language
@TrineDaely
Жыл бұрын
I expect my retired USAF meteorologist Dad agrees.
@OscarMike84
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, truly spoken like a couple of guys who never have actually seen a war, or taken part in the combat aspect of it. War in the nerdery is different than war on the front line.
@OscarMike84
Жыл бұрын
A bold faced lie you told here is, “it has been unseasonably rainy” and used that as one of your excuses as to why the so called “counteroffensive” hasn’t gone anywhere. Ukraine never made it out of Robotnye, they have been caught in a kill zone, can’t suppress Russian aviation, can’t suppress Russian artillery. They have been getting blasted by the tens of thousands in suicidal attacks forced on them to appease their western masters. This is a crime against humanity that is happening. I’ve seen it first hand. Please stop propagating this war from your nerdery and get back to maybe analyzing video games or whatever else. This is a slap to the face what you’re doing now to the men who’s faces are getting blown off by the hoardes in Ukraine.
@idealicfool
Жыл бұрын
@OscarMike84 lmao arent are a big man. I'm sure you have been out there in person to be telling us how it is. But yea nah when we are talking about someone on the staff for multiple admirals in his career, trust me they get to see. it. all.
@OscarMike84
Жыл бұрын
@@idealicfool yeah, from the nerdery. You know what happens in the nerdery? They make mistakes. All the time. Mistakes that cost people’s lives. Intelligence failures based on bad assumptions or “math” by people like Spaniel. This guy has no clue what he’s talking about, here. Way off base, way out of touch with reality of modern warfare. If you’re any serious military professional, this is laughable.
@Kaizala1933
Жыл бұрын
This is another level of cope, might as well contemplate an alternative universe where ukraine brings in the avengers and win!!, remember the occam's razor?😂😂😂
@cavalryscout9519
Жыл бұрын
I get the impression that Ukraine is taking a page from General Washington. Washington understood that since his forces were fighting for their homeland, they could only lose if they were destroyed. In Ukraine's case, if they are able to continue modest gains at low risk, they will eventually win, while would need to destroy the Ukrainian army and pacify any insurgency to claim victory.
@raevj
Жыл бұрын
That is fine, but they can’t expect other countries to fund their government & even pensions during the coming years of war.
@bbbruh8809
Жыл бұрын
@@raevj Dont worry they wont stop funding
@petergraphix6740
Жыл бұрын
@@raevj We can pay for it now, or we can pay for it when they start salami tactics in NATO countries. Or are you the type that things repeating WWII is a good idea?
@Andragil717
Жыл бұрын
@@raevj Can't see a reason why NATO would suddenly stop supporting Ukraine againts their No1 rival. This is the perfect golden opportunity for them to stem future Russian agression and expansionist policies with minimal sacrifices on their part while enjoying the public support with little to no backlash. If the cards get right there may be a possibility to even put an end to the prison of nations.
@ffff7164
Жыл бұрын
@@raevj That’s what hitler thought in 1939. The Brit’s would have to give up eventually, right?
@bangmo7
Жыл бұрын
Very insightful. Thanks a lot. Here are my 3 cents worth. The role division between money and blood This is not a proxy war. This is the 'division of role'. Ukrainian people pay by bood. The West pay by money (and information). This model has existed from time immemorial. Still not to this level of sophistication and scale. Especially the West had failed to mobilize the indigenous resolve in the developing (or more frankly, poor) countries, probably except South Korea during the Korean War. However, as for South Korea, the US and the international community shared the 'blood' with about 40,000 killed. 90% was the US soldiers. That is why they call the US-ROK alliance is 'blood bound'. (ROK stands for Republic of Korea) I believe the alliance will get stronger, since South Korea has succeeded by taking full advantage of what the US leaders have chosen as the global system, since Dec. 29, 1940. Roosevelt made his 'Arsenal of Democracy' speech that day. The alliance will function as an inspiration as long as our two countries share the basic human values such as individuality, freedom, fair market, intellectual integrity and reverence for religion (even though you are not a church goer or a Buddha follower. I am not.) By the way, about 140,000 South Korean soldiers were killed. About 750 thousands of South Korean civilians were either executed, killed as collateral damage, abducted or missing. About 700 thousands of the Chinese Army, the NK Army and the Soviet pilots/advisers were killed. About 2 million North Korean civilians were killed as collateral damage. Korean War was a competition of resolve as well as materials. More bombs were used than those in the WW2. It was Korean War where concentrated gasoline bombs (Napalm) were first introduced. When I was young, most of the hills and mountains were barren. During the monsoon, torrents of muddy water gushed through in every creek and river. Now South Korea is world's seventh or sixth most-dense-forest along the hills and mountains. They planted saplings all over the country, literally every square meter. South Korea is not big. Only about 100, 000, 000, 000 square meters. They did it for 30 years from 60s to 90s. There used to be a public holiday for this 'holy' task: April 5th. I am sure Ukraine will soon heal its wounds and become full of life. Humans are the strongest and toughest animals since they have souls. Nietzsche was wrong. He said "we are as strong as he-donkeys and she-donkeys." No. We are much, much stronger than donkeys, thanks to our souls. And Ukranians are a soulful stock. You can feel it when you hear them sing. ( I do not understand any Ukrainian word.) Paradoxically not every people can breed devils. Only the most soulful ones can. It is not a coincident Kim Il Sung is a Korean. Same with Ukranians. They are soulful and some really terrible guys came out from them: Trotsky, Martov, and even Khrushchev. Kazan and the Republic of Tartar (the home town of Lenin) are not far. Even Georgia (the home town of Stalin) is not far. The people who give birth to best human specimens can also the worst. That is why I do not think Putin can win. He is a 'vanity' guy from St. Petersburg. He is not entitled to be a devil. He is just a fraction of the devilish soul. By the way, the Ukrainian I love most is Nikolai Gogol, probably the best novelist human beings have ever seen. I think he saw the devil and stood against it and became the witness, just as tens of millions of Ukranians are doing now against the 'quasi devil'.
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
Superb!
@JohnGeorgeBauerBuis
Жыл бұрын
By the way, there are rumors that Putin was born in Georgia, although he grew up in what was then Leningrad.
@ievgeniipastukhov8204
Жыл бұрын
Thank you
@markandrzejak997
Жыл бұрын
I can see you put some serious time watch CNN
@davidkamaunu7887
Жыл бұрын
There were napalm bombs used in WW2. The US developed a specific type of incendiary device that was used against the German old city centers which created firestorms. Then they used it against the Japanese cities which were largely made of wood and paper.
@BruceMcNaughton-i9t
Жыл бұрын
I completely agree with your thesis here, but I would add the following consideration. As long as Russia remains in occupied Ukraine it is in a legal killing ground vis a vis the use of Western supplied weapons. If Ukraine were to drive Russia out of the occupied territory, they would be prohibited from continuing to attrit Russian forces with Western weapons. Russia would sit back, rebuild its military capacity, and come back at Ukraine in a few years. So, a war of attrition seems to be Ukraine's (and the West's) only viable long-term option
@joeyjojojrshabadoo7462
Жыл бұрын
Also gives the West perverse incentive to not provide anything that would result in a decisive victory. It's better for them to keep Russia engaged in Ukraine than for the Kremlin to cut their losses return abd focusing on Africa or Syria.
@bawoozee
11 ай бұрын
Stop telling lyes, ukraine will never win. Nato and america can only win against small countries not like Russia. Can america fight alone?
@yassennikolov3519
Жыл бұрын
Arestovych _months_ ago: ~"The counter offensive has 2 main tasks: 1) destroy the russian fighting capability 2) preserve the ukrainian fighting capability. Taking land can be done later at our leisure."
@arturobianco848
Жыл бұрын
Very interesting take. I do think that Ukraine thinks a big push is to risky. But that they want those 20 km. Problem is that Russia is defending way more forward then expected thus the progress has been a tad slower then they expected. I also give it a high likelyhood that that fictive memo or something close to it was on the desk with Zelensky. But i think you are wrong that they can't win a war of atrition. We are seeing a local superiority in at least quality of weapons and lately a serious degrading of Russia's air defense. Considering that they will have a serious enhanced capabilty next year they might just want to softening things up and keep the majority of their best equipment for a major push next year. Not because they didn't want to do it this year but that they where still to weak this year. I don't expect that they will liberate crimea next year just a push to asov sea. With crimea being the goals for 2025. If they can keep up the degradation of the russian equipment. Get the help of the West then the sanctions should do the trick by then. Remeber that russia is still hammering cash and that warchest is steadidely running towards empty. When it hits the botom Russia doesn't have that long before they can't sustain it money wise. And with Crimea gone so is the main reason for the war.
@LunaticTheCat
Жыл бұрын
I'd argue that not make a big push is even more risky since they are risking losing support from Washington.
@arturobianco848
Жыл бұрын
@@LunaticTheCat Do they? Or is it just the media thats talking about it cause Ukraine isn't giving them the clicks they want. Bothe the normal Republicans and the Democrates are pretty commited to Ukraine. Its only the russians sponsored lunatis that are opposed to it.
@Agamon
Жыл бұрын
Thank god. Rough day. I needed some lines on maps to fill the void.
@danpetrescu4915
11 ай бұрын
american have a frustation , ukraineans die , and someone make a video try to make black in withe and viceversa . how many ukrainean die in each our ? selenschi slepp well . that is the question
@arkzbh
Жыл бұрын
My theory regarding Putin Kim meeting is that, Putin is trying to basically buy "men/troops" from North Korea to avoid mobilization, not arms or ammunitions
@jacqdanieles
Жыл бұрын
Good possibility. Or at least to use them in the back to free up fighters doing mundane things.
@arkzbh
Жыл бұрын
@@jacqdanieles yes, or even to send them to the meat grinders. He is already buying soldiers from Iran
@timtrewyn453
Жыл бұрын
Kim should see an opportunity for his best forces to rotate in and gain combat experience. This could tax Ukraine and tip local battles to the Russians. Kim can lean on his nuclear shield if the US and SK try to poke Kim's paranoia with a military exercise. The NK troop threat should not be minimized, but I doubt Kim will send big numbers. All the more reason to go after the Russian rail system and air mobility assets.
@ffff7164
Жыл бұрын
North Korean mercenaries are a threat to Kim Jong Un’s power. What if a North Korean commander decided to go Wagner on Kim?
@gerardmichaelburnsjr.
Жыл бұрын
And Cubans are also being filtered out to fight in Russia. That will probably speed up. Cubans study Russian in school, so integration won't be that hard. Russia already has lots of minorities whose Russian is pretty basic. They often have them in segregated units, like the Chechens.
@legikgeo
Жыл бұрын
Bwahahaha... This report is so far from reality that I don’t even have the strength to mock it... But I pulled myself together. Russians even did not deploy 90% of mobilized soldiers. And they've also recruited 400k volunteers since this year started. Ukrainians have no planes. They've lost their best units and mobilized 9 times. What attrition? At what point defensive lines will become untennable? They are fortified as hell. While the first line is still not broken! Are you kidding me? The is no consistency in Bakhmut offensive (which ended btw), just another PR win. West and Ukrainians think they can win a battle with that kind of stories. All they win is time to get more money. Well that is temporary. And that story with the himars in that pocket reaching all the roads: surely Russian's can't attack them from the sides. Even with artillery! Not to mention other types of weapons. Pure speculation and coping. I feel sad for Ukrainians. While they die, Graham counts the money and dreams about the percentage of Russian losses. Pfit. That is pure populism, Spaniel. Let's check your predictions on Russian mobilization.
@YouD0ntSay
Жыл бұрын
I've said this a year ago. And it's not Ukraine's strategy to grind down the RU military power, it's the US'. RU will cease to be a threat for at least a generation or two, and the US can focus on stopping China from taking over SE Asia. That's why the military aid comes as slowly as it comes.
@jpt3640
Жыл бұрын
Interesting thought... don't tell china
@ChucksSEADnDEAD
Жыл бұрын
Military aid comes slowly because it takes time to plan, refurbish, train and ship.
@correctionguy7632
Жыл бұрын
People keep parroting this point, but why then wouldnt the US provide Ukraine with long range missiles to hit russias massive stockpiles of armored vehicles and artillery pieces?
@legoeasycompany
Жыл бұрын
@@correctionguy7632 Because everything the US has been giving is things it can spare meanwhile there isn't any long range missiles to spare?
@YouD0ntSay
Жыл бұрын
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD I disagree. The decision is political. If our own countries were attacked we wouldn't take 2 years until we decide to produce more ammo. Germany has built several LPG terminals that normally take 5-7 years to plan and build in 10 months and brought down its gas imports from Russia from 55% to practically zero in merely a year. These are political decisions. What also plays a role is your place in history. Allowing RU to escalate first and then respond rather slowly exposes RU as the bad guy. Imagine Nato would have flooded UA with modern weaponry in early 92 and RU would have been beaten out within months. The narrative would now be that poor Russia was provoked and the west had prepared the war and created the situation. History is important. And by reacting slowly we leave RU and PRC in the dark about what we'd be really capable of - and where our weak spots are - if it came to the crunch.
@HT-io1eg
Жыл бұрын
1. Ukraine doesn’t have air superiority or even close to parity. Lightning advances are impossible without this when… 2. The slow build up of equipment, trained troops and prepared plans allowed deep and significant defence lines, in particular mine fields. These pretty much negate the new armour. Everything slows down and changes from needing 3-1 force multiplier attacking prepared defences to 3-1 PLUS agonisingly slow advances over the most mined territory in the world 3. Ukraine has suffered significant personnel losses for sure BUT it’s a citizen army of brothers, fathers, sons and Zelenskyy cannot throw men away less he lose the support of the people. AND it’s just not the Western way, troops are valuable, they are people and cannot be ‘expended’ or fed into the meat grinder like the Russians do. Ukraine is now a Western European country, 30 years on from the soviet era. 4. This has enforced the evolution into a war of attrition where Ukraine expends materiel and Russia loses bodies
@bbbruh8809
Жыл бұрын
And this is good strategy indeed
@bbbruh8809
Жыл бұрын
math is cringe btw
@senatorjosephmccarthy2720
Жыл бұрын
Now it's up to the people of all NATO to keep the pressure on the decision makers to supply Ukraine with everything needed, and to keep on supplying those materials. If NATO allows russia to conquer Ukraine, china and russia will together increase their conquering across the Pacific or across Europe. Ukraine is doing the fighting for NATO.
@wren2900
10 ай бұрын
Ukraine already ran out of young men and starting mobilising old men and women. So what victory of attrition are you talking about?
@jamesewanchook2276
Жыл бұрын
Send them the much needed ammo and heavy ordnance to win. Slava Ukraini! 🇨🇦🇺🇦
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
Well, they already sent them ammo and heavy ordnance but NOTHING. Result for ukros are lost teritory, lost 500.000 soldiers.
@jamesewanchook2276
Жыл бұрын
@@tokyo.peking bs, ivan.
@abdelrahmantarek5439
Жыл бұрын
@@tokyo.peking 400000*
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
@@abdelrahmantarek5439 At least..
@inf3243
Жыл бұрын
I think Ukraine saw - in their defense of Bakhmut, and in their the first few days of the Counterattack - that attacking a defended position is mostly a suicide mission, and strongly favours the defender. They're trying to be responsible and not throw the lives of their men away. If they had overwhelming air power it'd be different, they could drop standoff weapons on a position all day to soften it up before an attack...but feel like they've learned that the only way to win the game is not to play. So shifting to an attrit and starve strategy.
@VIT-ey8wo
Жыл бұрын
Why aren't they sending western tanks instead of sending hordes of soldiers on foot at enemy positions then?
@Kuraimizu9152
Жыл бұрын
@@VIT-ey8wobecause western tanks get jumped by artillery and airstrikes
@inf3243
Жыл бұрын
@@VIT-ey8wo I guess because against prepared positions, tanks are a death trap.
@dismantledbrain5910
Жыл бұрын
If they are trying to be responsible about it, they are doing a horrible job. So many vehicles and men lost for close to nothing.
@agricolaurbanus6209
Жыл бұрын
'Atrit and Starve'? So Ukraine will out-produce and out-man Russia?😂 It is too late anyway. Russia will keep grinding down Ukrainian fighting ability whether they run into mine fields or dig into trenches. The point of no return has long been reached. And NATO/Ukraine would never beat Russia in it's own border. Faulty paradigm to begin with. All this 'new strategy' narrative is just a cope.😂
@luszczi
Жыл бұрын
Way back at the beginning of the offensive I remember Zaluzhnyi saying something to the effect that taking territory is secondary, the most important objective is, well, eliminating the enemy. Not sure if that pertains to it, but it did come to mind.
@GusOfTheDorks
Жыл бұрын
What the actuall hell is this video. It arguess a war of attrition is about more than numbers, then says its all about numbers.
@nomar5spaulding
Жыл бұрын
Ask an Eve Online player if spreadsheets can win wars. If having the most resources always meant you win an attritional battle, the alliance holding Delve would have never changed. It had several times.
@koffmann1689
Жыл бұрын
In the realm of combined arms strategy, a fundamental principle is the establishment of air superiority as a primary objective. Unfortunately, Ukraine faces significant challenges in this regard, given its limited number of fighter jets and the technological disparity compared to Russia. The historical significance of both strategic and tactical advantages achieved through air superiority and close-air support cannot be overstated, as exemplified by their pivotal role in the outcome of World War II. From the Battle of Britain onwards, air power enabled the Allies not only to resist the Axis forces but also to secure ultimate victory by systematically targeting and dismantling enemy factories. Therefore, in any conflict, the highest priority must always be the attainment of air superiority, as it lays the foundation for success.
@515coldfire
Жыл бұрын
NATO mastered the domination of airspace but they did not expect going to a real war with russia.
@thebigenchilada678
Жыл бұрын
@@515coldfirenato is a joke
@zmilorad
Жыл бұрын
WW2 was won by Soviets, western countries had contributed little and Normandy happend just to prevent Soviets to conquer the whole Europe.
@DarkSnake49542
Жыл бұрын
Technically, Ukraine always got Air superiority, as Russia couldn't send its aircrafts over Ukraine's territory. Instead, Russia decided to use long range missile/gliding bombs to avoid air defense while being able to attack from the air. (are those accurate enough ? maybe not but that's better that not using their aircrafts at all) That's the reason why teaching Nato strategies to Ukraine was always weird, as Nato is about getting full air superiority everywhere then do CAS from the air. (mostly aircraft&drones&helicopers, eventually mobile artillery too) Demining some parts of that territory to get tanks&armored transport vehicules to pass while having Russian drones watching&sending artillery strikes&air strikes on them would surely not happen if Ukraine got full air superiority. (which they got in the sense no aircraft other than drones fly over them, not that they can prevent most air strike if those aircrafts only strike from so far away from air defense)
@carlosw1687
Жыл бұрын
@@515coldfire NATO is a bunch of coward gangsters
@SupGaillac
Жыл бұрын
Culturally, USA does not know the concept of scarcity of resources. Which usually translate into "go big", and historically with a lot of success. Ukraine does know, and thus, plays accordingly. ... nice vid hinting toward, that, btw!
@widerje
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine is out if trained men. It is not feasible to form a military on the fly. Conscripts are receiving "expedited" training, aka insufficient. Combined with Russias air/artillery supremacy, victory is slipping away. Biden and company have sacraficed Ukrainian military on an unrealistic strategy. This is about "weakening" Rusysua, not victory. Why didnt Ukraine build large defences, dig in and preserve resources? A smaller military attacking hardened defences, while under fire, crossing mine fields is absurd. Obviously politicians are running point on strategic decisions. Ukraine Should have taken Istanbul peace deal last April. Now Russia has taken land, and will not be returned. Crimea is a pipe dream, the citizens there do not welcome Ukraine, they are pro-Russian. Ukraine makes peace now, or Unconditional surrender later. Make peace you fools.
@BennyGarrison
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine passed a law allowing women to be sent to combat. its so over of them anyone with experience knows once a woman in your crew gets shrapnel through their leg or whatever the screaming is going to make your unit combat ineffective as most guys priority will being getting the wounded woman out.
@ajr993
Жыл бұрын
One thing we do know is that Ukraine has a serious artillery advantage developing. Western tech and counter battery radars are making ukraines artillery, pound for pound, several times more effective. Satellite images show Russia is scraping the bottom of the barrel for new artillery pieces and depleting its depots. So perhaps the key data here is that Ukraine just needs to keep obliterating Russian artillery and using cluster munitions to cause mass Russian casualties, benefiting from Russian insistence to hold their ground no matter what, and even kill their own soldiers for retreating. Om top of that, Ukraine continues substantial investment in logistical shaping operations in the south. One of their key transport and logistic ships was just destroyed, as that was an important supply option to compensate for Ukraine destroying roads and bridges. On top of that Russian morale is plummeting to unheard of levels as soldiers were just told they would not be rotated at all. So a logistical unraveling combined with a morale disaster could lead to Russian forces collapsing dramatically. The intelligence reports likely reveal Russian logistics are tetering on the edge considering so many supply routes have been damaged. The rains may also actually favor Ukraine. Russia relies mostly on trucks for last mile delivery, but those will be unusable come the rainy season. It's possible Ukraine could launch a mass light infantry push once artillery and Russian supplies have been sufficiently depleted.
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
Empty words. For Soldier who has no navy, no airforce, no own capabilites there is only one destiny.
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
@@Domesticated_Ape Why ?
@grahamstrouse1165
Жыл бұрын
@@tokyo.pekingSome people don’t like genocidal fascists. Apparently you do. Your momma must be proud.
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
@@Domesticated_Ape So, you do not want Lewinsky and his NAZIs to chase Russians out of ukraina. Ok.
@michael-m
Жыл бұрын
When I get the alert that William has uploaded new content it truly makes my day. I thoroughly enjoy the way these breakdowns are done, it's so much different than any other Ukraine/military related channels. So much thank, my friend. Much appreciated
@deathcomfortsme
Жыл бұрын
So well said my friend😊😊😊😊😊😊
@joeybobbie1
Жыл бұрын
Yep, I Second that.👍
@VenturiLife
Жыл бұрын
Russia's strategy is to make it so painful for Ukraine that they cede the territories that Russia claims is theirs. Ukraine doesn't really have the upper hand in terms of manpower, and in any war of attrition, their winning conditions are getting all their territory back which is a big ask.
@krishsangs6610
Жыл бұрын
Look hard enough and you’ll find a silver lining in anything 🤣🤣
@Chuck_Hooks
Жыл бұрын
Russians are running out of cope tires.
@firerock9320
Жыл бұрын
I wonder if these same people would have said how slow the Allied counter offensive in WW2 was and would have stated the Allies would have lost due to the speed.
@gary_beniford
Жыл бұрын
@nofuxgoon yes. Zelensky had to bring his nazi friend in Canada to the parliament and get his celebrations/honors he never got fighting for the Germans!
@kocyszemaitis2310
11 ай бұрын
You are modest,compertent and do not throw your academic credentials around. good on you! plus, your analysis is on the money.
@J--12
10 ай бұрын
Ну чё нахрюки, когда там перемоги намечаются?
@FlyingGuy
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine is losing the war of attrition. Russia's capability to wage war has been greatly underestimated.
@dmitryadamenko6518
Жыл бұрын
Yeah, but nothing is linear. So we wait until tide changes
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
Your explanation is FUTILE. Nobody can explain why UKRAINA lost 60.000 in "counter offensive" for NOTHING. They simply do not care gor own ppl.
@millzz1178
Жыл бұрын
lol someone is coping hard
@tokyo.peking
Жыл бұрын
@@millzz1178 So, you know better ? Any argument ?
@mjl1966y
Жыл бұрын
You can't have combined arms without an air element. If CA did fail (and I'm not convinced they really tried it), it's because we gave them everything they need except air power. It's like going to hockey camp without a stick. That's on us.
@FlyingGuy
Жыл бұрын
LOL... you cant give "air power" to untrained people. This isnt a damn video game. Get ready to be drafted, they are going to send you.
@akulkis
Жыл бұрын
Not nearly as easy as you think. For every pilot, you need to train a dozen ground support crew. And maintaining NATO aircraft is a LOT more difficult than maintaining the Russian-designed aircraft produced under the Soviet Union government.
@brianprowse2543
11 ай бұрын
@@akulkisa dozen? More like 100. Every hour an F-16 flies it requires 17 man maintenance hours to continue flying. And that’s just maintaining the aircraft, not fuel, armament, computer components, ect.
@racing_mntage1584
Жыл бұрын
With women in the front lines, we would surely push the orcs away!!!!
@yabutmaybenot.6433
Жыл бұрын
Your coverage of this war has really impressed me, not just for your deep knowledge, and research. Also for your fondness of lines on maps. A love of all war gamers.
@sedna90377
Жыл бұрын
"Numbers don't lie and they spell disaster for Ukraine." He just dropped Steiner math on this video! 😂
@Jondiceful
Жыл бұрын
Another point alluded to but never stated in this episode is that this is not a war with binary outcomes- win or lose. It is a war in which out of all possible outcomes, those are the outliers. Victory and defeat is far more likely to be shades of gray. Both sides are trying to stack the odds in their favor in the hopes of securing the most favorable of possible outcomes and avoiding the least favorable of possible outcomes. Both sides certainly hope for total victory, but I very much doubt that their current strategy is aiming for anything of the sort. Russia expects to suffer some losses, but the defensive line aims to minimize those losses and that strategy appears to have worked. Meanwhile, Ukraine is trying to take as much as they can without taking too many losses. They're both bargain hunting for the next best deal which happens to be the acceptance of the status quo with allowances for marginal gains or losses. A rapid full-out offensive is too big of a gamble for either side, as Putin so eloquently revealed at the start of this war. Ukraine knows Russia is playing the long game, waiting for the West to give up and walk away. The response that is expected to force from Ukraine is the pressure to commit everything to one big offensive to end the war. But Ukraine also knows that this is a risk they would shoulder alone. If they fail and Putin wins the war, the West has the consolation prize of saying "Oh well, at least we tried!" Ukrainians, on the other hand, would have nothing, which frankly may well include their lives in additional to any material losses. Better to keep winning a painfully slow victory and slow-walk to success than to charge in where angels fear to tread and watch you allies erecting statues in your memory as your captors march you off to the gulags, or worse. Now that isn't to say either side is prepared to accept the status quo as a permanent outcome to this war; rather, I am saying that the status quo prohibits any immediate commitment to the more desirable outcomes because the risks are too high. They fight on because they still believe that the optimal outcome is achievable, but they move deliberately slowly because the least desirable outcomes are still more achievable in the event any major action is taken. They're waiting for the other side to blink. Until then, they will violently stare each other down. Well, that's my take anyway.
@dnaseb9214
Жыл бұрын
Too bad that theory failed when in practice
@corcaighrebel
Жыл бұрын
Thanks for the video, certainly raises some fascinating questions. Ukraine seems to be building, building, building pressure.....feels like something has to give. Russians have good defences which are slowly being penetrated while their logistics have to be under extreme pressure not to mind men left in the field with next to no rotation, doesn't feel sustainable. One has a sense the conflict in its current form could go on for 12 more months or a part of the Russian front could collapse in 12 days due to the controlled pressure. Ukraine clearly is aware of the difficulties of the attacking force & the potential for large losses it cannot afford so it is a bit by bit approach with pressure in several areas along with frequent missile strikes at munition hubs. Does feel like chess.
@Ugly_German_Truths
Жыл бұрын
They still hold back a couple of their new strike brigades... so it all could be a rope a dope. Hammering down with tiny blows on Zaporizhia until the Russians have to move reenforcements from Kherson and Upper Luchansk and THEN going through one of these flanks with the full rolling tank attack... Kharkiv worked similarly a bit more than one year ago...
@sports__moments
Жыл бұрын
They've advanced 2km and taken Robotyne a village of 480 people. How are they building pressure? Armour didn't work, now infantry tactics clearly won't achieve any major breakthrough. Russian troops more rested, Ukraines probably lost 100,000 men this counteroffensive
@SamuelPHoak
Жыл бұрын
Glad to see Russo-phobia alive and well 🎉
@henryvegter8773
Жыл бұрын
Yes and Russo paranoia playing out as well.
@Zorro33313
Жыл бұрын
Since that naziglorifying event in Canada parliament it should be crystal clear for anyone Collective West is simply 4th Reich.
@panzerofthelake506
Жыл бұрын
"Glad to see hatred against a particular group or nation" You see why people conflate Ukraine with the Nazis? Because Ukranian supporters like you genuinely hate Russians.
@brad5696
Жыл бұрын
To be fair, it is well earned.
@Zorro33313
Жыл бұрын
@@brad5696 by western propaganda - sure
@aickavon
Жыл бұрын
The thing is, to do something impressive and flashy can have a price tag that people are unwilling to cash. Sometimes it is just safer to begin an attritional fight. They had to do this MULTIPLE times in the war already, and eventually the Russians broke and a massive gain was made.
@macattack5863
Жыл бұрын
The question is who bears the cost. Attritional warfare has a more obvious cost to the west. A decisive strike results in high Ukrainian casualties. Ukrainian casualties mean very little to the average Westerner and a lot to the average Ukrainian.
@aickavon
Жыл бұрын
@@macattack5863 Currently Russians bare the cost and both Ukraine and the Western forces are saving on everything BUT ammunition. Attritional warfare, funny enough, can be actually practical in saving on resources since you're not committing to expensive successes.
@macattack5863
Жыл бұрын
@@aickavon to say the west and Ukraine aren't bearing substantial cost from attrition warfare is a bold statement. Regardless Western moral is of huge consequence if the war flips just 2% of voters away from Biden then Ukraine must win before Nov 2024
@ffff7164
Жыл бұрын
@@macattack5863 Majority of Independents, Democrats, and a significant minority of Republicans all support lend lease. The Republicans are divided on Russia, and the only way democrats can weapon the divide is if they continue their tough-on-Russia policy. Biden would be a idiot (possible) if he abandons his voter base on the Ukraine issue to curry favor with maga republicans who would never vote for him no matter what.
@basilisamorales3907
Жыл бұрын
I believe that it is not a decision of Ukraine but of NATO and the USA.
@Qdog223
Жыл бұрын
Ukraine may be delaying a concentrated offensive awaiting air superiority. Ukraine is concentrating on hitting Russia's artillery as well as transport vehicles, a strategy that will serve them in the long run. I really enjoy your youtubes, please keep them coming.
@islandwills2778
Жыл бұрын
meanwhile russia is ALSO DOING THE SAME.
@sports__moments
Жыл бұрын
Getting 30 F-16 (a 46-year old plane) isn't going to do shit. Russia has S-300 and S-400 missile systems that will see the F16s light up on radar like a Christmas tree. The Russians have more modern fighters and they can get shot down too.
@egroegny
Жыл бұрын
If Ukraine is gambling on an attrition strategy, then they should pursue a strategy of utilizing small guerilla infiltrations (like the native forces in Vietnam and Afghanistan) coupled with a defensive line of their own.
@ДмитрийЕронов-л5р
Жыл бұрын
all commentators are so sure of Ukraine's infallibility. But I must say that former citizens of Ukraine are fighting in Donetsk and Lugansk. This happened due to the fact that the authorities in Kiev and residents of the western regions of Ukraine came to the east with weapons in their hands.
@egroegny
Жыл бұрын
@@ДмитрийЕронов-л5р I think if all the parties had abide by the Minsk Agreement, there would not have been a war. Too bad - Angel Merkel and the Europeans were insincere with respect to the Minsk Agreement.
@ffff7164
Жыл бұрын
@@egroegny The Minsk agreements convinced Putin that the west will let him have all of Ukraine, so he made his move.
@ChucksSEADnDEAD
Жыл бұрын
The Vietnamese took massive casualties. The Tet Offensive had a bunch of deep infiltration attacks combined with conventional front line assaults and it was still an unmitigated disaster. The Viet Cong were nearly wiped out and the NVA had to send regular troops to fill their ranks. Like Russia is sending Russian men to DPR/LPR units to make up for the fact that they were nearly annihilated.
@egroegny
Жыл бұрын
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD You are correct. The question is would the Vietnamese have lost more men if they had fought conventionally like the Americans. If they had fought conventionally, they would have played into the strength of the Americans. As for the Ukrainians, sending conventional troops without air support straight into the Surovikin line plays into the strength of the Russian. If I were Zelensky, I would not send any large formations against the Russians. I would use drones and small groups of special ops (or guerrilla fighters) to infiltrate the Russian defensive lines to cause havoc and chaos to disrupt supplies and ammunition. I would create my own defensive lines and try to preserve the lives of my men. Only when the West has supplied me with enough material for me to have a technical superiority would I launch a massive attack. Again, sending troops against the Russian defensive lines play right in the hands of the Russians.
@MLN-yz4ph
Жыл бұрын
The losses in at the start of the war due to the failure of the West keeping its word after the original agreements years ago set this stage. Add to that the total failure to respond in 2014 has set this table. The most likely outcome is something similar to the DMZ in Korea. I do expect Ukraine to get some of the South back just not a major part before this has to end for them. It would be different if there was someone that could or would roll in to help but there is not at this point. So my fall 2024 prediction is something will be signed that freezes things. The Question is will the West learn and fortify Ukraine the same way South Korea was? NATO has already won by the addition of other countries and Russia is a shell of itself now vs even a few years ago. My worry is we will again try to take something that is not real, the peace dividend. Everything here is simply due to the failure to plan for war, because no peace survives that!
@grahamstrouse1165
Жыл бұрын
I don’t think Ukraine’s going to stop this time until Russia’s done & dusted.
@НикоэльСам
11 ай бұрын
Your Western delusional fantasies are based on the fact that Russia will give up a step away from victory. You perceive Putin 's kindness and pity for Ukrainians as weakness .The fact is that Putin can turn off all electricity and heating in the cities of Ukraine for the winter and in the spring he has elections and needs to show significant success at the front...
@aizensosuke873
Жыл бұрын
The cope on this channel is hilarious... 😅 - This is Ukraine's year, victory is on the horizon! - Thing's may not he moving as fast, but Ukraine will still win later this year! - Ok... things are bogging down... but Ukraine is still winning! - Maybe we are just misunderstanding Ukraine's strategy here... here's their real 4D plan... maybe?!?!???? Hahahaha, keep moving that goal post 😂😂😂
@darthsidius9631
Жыл бұрын
I am total noob when it comes to warfare but one thing raises a question, how could Ukraine execute combined arms approach when it doesn't have the airpower necessary to do it?
@darthsidius9631
Жыл бұрын
Also Ukraine lacks minesweeping equipment necessary for counter offensive too and probably for combined arms approach also
@royalpain6338
Жыл бұрын
They cant, and nobody wants to admit it. I don't think there has been an assault like the one Ukraine is doing since the battle of the bulge (defender has air supremacy and attacker has no aaa) Honestly this last attack feels like a desperate attempt to secure continued funding and support from the west, also it seems like Ukraine is trying to strike at the pipelines leading to turkey. Overall this conflict is Russias war to loose if they just dont screw up massively they can probably "win" as if anyone other than raytheon is getting anything good out of this war, But this is Russia vs Ukraine both sides are equally as stupid, corrupt, poorly supplied and accident prone. So its anyone's guess who will "win".
@donttellmymisses1581
Жыл бұрын
They can click their heels three times and wish upon a star. Cope and negotiations would better serve them.
@diogorodrigues747
Жыл бұрын
@@darthsidius9631 They could, but it would lead to more losses.
@diogorodrigues747
Жыл бұрын
@@donttellmymisses1581 Would you negotiate with a shark if that animal was trying to kill you?
@alexanderminin8854
10 ай бұрын
This is just insane. I can't believe that someone is saying that relatively small country (relative to Russia obviously. First of all in terms of population) is trying to fight a attrition war
@GeistInTheMachine
10 ай бұрын
He's coping.
@jayquelen
10 ай бұрын
@@GeistInTheMachinecoping with what exactly?
@tomci.guitarra
9 ай бұрын
this channel is bland propaganda tbh
@putzthewondersloth
Жыл бұрын
One thing about the strength of each combatant is that Ukraine can put more of its forces into the war where Russia really can't. Russia is fighting outside their nation and have to keep a significant amount of their forces in reserve for other potential threats, both external and internal (ie Wagner). True that Russia has the bigger army, but it's a divided army.
@Khobai
Жыл бұрын
no russias pretty much all in on ukraine. wagner proved that when they went on their little roadtrip and encountered zero opposition.
@putzthewondersloth
Жыл бұрын
@@Khobai I was considering that too. Unless they're as incompetent as they appear, Russia should have learned a huge lesson from that and started keeping loyal forces closer to home.
@danielkirpichnikov2007
Жыл бұрын
2021 Mom, I've become an epidemiologist expert 2023 Mom, I've become an military and political expert. That's all what these vids are about and have never touch of reality. The problem with ukrainian "offensive" is that US support never meant to be sufficient to the level that they can achieve victory. The fast victory for ukraine is never a goal for US. They want a new money laundry, as they did with Afghanistan. That's it. Another reason is constant underestimating their opponents, so they will give more excuses when things aren't going according to plan. You can hear it, if you pay attention.
Пікірлер: 4,6 М.