@@fishbed214 it actually isnt because months before the referendum Crimea declared independence from Ukriane because of the government coup in Kiev. And then independent Crimea chose to reunite with Russia. These were two different events
In the mid '90s a friend of mine joined the French Foreign Legion with romantic notions of multi cultural brotherhood and learning French. He instead discovered that Russian was the de facto language spoken as apart from the officers it was made up almost entirely of ex Russian soldiers.
I hope this the first in a series. It would be interesting to see the UK, Germany, Poland, and maybe even the collective capability (to the degree such a thing exists) of the EU.
I feel that an assessment of the UK's modern capabilities would be depressing given the fact that successive governments have gutted the Armed Forces (and the state of the RN is tragic).
Idk where you get your infos from but from what is in the german news, the Bundeswehr is in a horrible shape. The euqipment is old and most of it doesn't really work. Planes, tanks, helicopters, all branches have problems. They have difficulties finding new recruits and are horrible under funded.
And you can name one military in the world where that is different? In most areas the German army is still in better shape then the rest of europe. For example, the media is complaining that only 50% of the helicopters are available. That might sound bad but is nothing unusual. Maintenance of relatively old systems is time consuming.
Military History Visualized Thank you for putin so much effort in your videos, and for being a reliable source unlike everything else arround us. The gnome overlord will surely spare you from the salt mines for this effort. Keep up the good work ❤
Nukes killed maybe up to 300,000 people throughout the entire history, major conventional wars killed ten of millions. Even non-global war like Iraq War already killed 700,000+ people, including consequence of that, like insurgencies, that would add up to millions.
But but tanks and nukes don't kill people, people kill people! Everyone should be able to own a nuke. Because the onlything stopping a man with a nuke, is another man with a nuke. And a nuke ban would only be a law that good guys choose to follow, while the bad guys always will get their weapons illegally.
As a russian, i think the most important problem of our military is our country's economy. Nowdays it's just impossible to have strong and modern military without strong economy in the country. As a result, we have to import a lot of components for our military, not develop and produce them ourselves. I'm afraid, that we're just using soviet equipment and researches and our modern projects are very limited due to low funds.
But this is not a result of military policy, rather the results of economic policy.
7 лет назад
+ I need no channel youtube! Well, if the Putin regime didn't want to support such massive military spending and invade other countries (Putin started 3 wars and is involved in a 4th) the Russian economy would be much better. For example for just a few billion euros, you could rebuild all of Moscow and get rid of the old appartments where entire families live in appartments of 30-50 square meters with up to 6 people. To compare: as a student without any money I lived on 17 square meters. My first flat for myself was 51 sq/m. Now I got 120 sq/m and I'm looking to purchase a 330 sq/m home with my girlfriend. That means that the two of us will live on the same space that eight to ten Russian families live on.
It's interesting as well, that the Russian economy has laid fairly stagnant for the past decade. The large increase in spending, in pure dollars, was matched by an increase in %of GDP (just going off the graph here) meaning that the Russian economy has stayed at the same point. I figure it makes sense that any prosperous people in any country will be better able to fight a war; hopefully they, too, will be less likely to start one.
5:09 Not quite. The FSB only inherited the counterintelligence/domestic intelligence segments of the KGB whereas the SVR became the Russian foreign intelligence agency.
Much better review of military strength than other "xyz military power" videos on RU-vid. Unlike those videos where they just throw out numbers of troops and equipment (which means little tbh) this is a lot more intelectual and analytical. Good work
Would you be interested in doing some kind of military analysis of the Syrian Civil War? It has the potential to be interesting, although is of course difficult given that it is an ongoing event with political controversy attached.
Hey MHV. I am currently in the midst of doing a college project investigating how Finland managed to stand up so well against the Soviet Union during the winter war. I took a trip to Finland to visit the museums and see the historical sides of Helsinki (highlight being the Mannerheim museum). I recently asked on one of your world of warships streams whether you'll be doing any more videos on the winter war and you said you were currently reading up on it. I was hoping you could point me towards the most credible books out there? Currently reading "A Frozen Hell" by William R Trotter. Many thanks
I just wanted to say I like how you translate the names that were given in Russian like you did with IPb and didn’t just badly pronounce it and leave it at that.
Thanks. DIA report is good but it misses one important change in that combination of elements. Mercenary component (for lack of better word) while not (yet) legitimised, is now integral part of military projection. It was not yet analysed thoroughly in Western sources - at least not in open ones.
I really like your videos and I thoroughly appreciate what you're doing and what you're trying to do. And for that, I'm genuinely very sorry to say this (the thought is just too funny for me not to enunciate it here): Hearing you talk about in-depth analyses of Russian military strengths and weaknesses in your heavy German accent, makes me very suspiciously think you're planning your *own* Operation Barbarossa...
A problem with modern western assesments of Russian Military is the lack of qualified experts on Russia. This leads to a variety of absurd statements in the reports. Such as meanings of word "maskirovka" or using of term "Russian Spetsnaz"
I think most people use the term "Spetsnaz" interchangeably with "Russian Special forces" and aren't actually referencing a group known as "Spetsnaz", at least that's what I hope.
Spetsnaz is a term that is equal to specops. There are many kinds of Spetsnaz? Well, there are many kinds of specops under SOCOM. "Maskirovka" is a Western term for the famous Russian bullshitting skills, also known as "pokazukha", as applied to military matters.
+Smart LP problem with word 'maskirovka' described in the comment section of corresponding video by MHV. Problem with term 'Spetsnaz' is that it used by common people to reference all Russian special forces. But i think, such vulgar use of this term is inapropriate for report by US DIA.
I would like a video about the Syrian 2017 counter-offensive against Daesh comparing it with Rommel campaign. Seriously, many things are almost textbook examples of how Rommel indicated war in desert should be conducted.
Podemos URSS and it was performed with the help of Russian advisor and merc.It would be interesting to assess Russian tactics with that offensive.
7 лет назад
+Podemos URSS What are you smoking? Pro-dictator and Russian forces have shyed away from fighting ISIS, under Putin's orders. Putin first wants to crush the rebellion by the Syrian people, and only then destroy one of his best customers on the black market for weapons, namely ISIS. The recent destruction of ISIS as a state was done by the Syrian Democratic Forces, the people's uprising against Assad. You know, those people who are having entire villages gassed by Russian and pro-dictator airstrikes....
+Blah b you're ignoring the liberation of Deir Ezzor in what was the fastest seizure of ISIS territory ever conducted, I wouldn't say it was textbook desert warfare but they certainly took a lot of ground very fast, and also in certain circumstances ISIS literally just gave territory to SDF in exchange for surrender.
I advise you to look at a military map like syriancivilwarmap. then you will see that Russia and Syria have been the ones who fought and liberated areas from ISIS and Al-Nusra the most.
Nope. The "Syrian Democratic Forces" haven't destroyed ISIS, in fact have cooperated with ISIS AGAINST "pro-dictator" forces. You're talking bullshit, specially when the "Syrian Democratic Forces" are neither Syrian nor democratic, but are made out of groups like Al Nusra (former Al Qaeda), and are mostly comprised of mercenaries. The "Syrian Democratic Forces" have been only taking minor guerrilla actions against the government, not against Daesh, and are usually seen as allies.
I really like how you show historical facts or recent facts without any bias. Just facts. So we can get a good grasp of the possibilty of an army. Especially in our times there is a lot of propaganda regarding Russia.
The word "Maskirovka" (рус. Маскировка) is not used in the meaning as it was suggested by the video. Instead in Russia, analysts/journalists use the common term "Hybrid warfare" (рус. Гибридная война). Also, nothing was said about Russian private military companies (or maybe i missed that part). If you are interested in the subject, check out "Wagner group" on wiki.
cleric7788 It's very difficult for him to do this as there is too little info about Syrian military and the situation of the Syrian military is too fluid
Russia may have a powerful military and the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. But a two hour drive outside of Moscow in the rural areas. Their are people living as if they where in the 1940s. The people of Russian deserve a lot better than their current government
I completely agree with you at this point (however the statement about living in the 40s is slightly exaggerated). The lack of modern facilities in province is a very annoying problem for a regular person in Russia, yet I see a little current government's fault in it.
+Matt Kid Socialism is over, no more nice free stuff for stupid people. If those people can't take care of themselves, Putin just can't help them. The true cancer of post-soviet society is people's infantilism. Literally half of people are sitting on their asses doing nothing, and blaming Putin for everything that THEY can not do.
thats... not actually true. He wont the last presidential election with 63% of the vote. Even if you account for his incumbent advantages, hes still absurdly popular there.
One thing that stands out for me, is modern doctrine regarding PGM's. Most of the Russian propaganda video's I've seen from Syria shows the Russian airforce dropping non-PGM weapons (which is consistent with the report civilian death toll). This suggests that Russia either doesn't have extensive inventory of PG kits or that they are too expensive to use in Syria.
I think Russia with its current Stealth Fighter and Armata program has significantly closed the tech gap it had accumulated in the 90s. The only things I feel they are lacking in are drone technology and the ability to buy the newer weapons in significant numbers. Their navy is rather poor too.
Electronics are a problem for Russia military since USSR time. For example they have to import crucial components for tank thermal sights from France. But AFAIK new T-14's FCS is top notch
7 лет назад
You're aware that the Armata uses stolen 1980's Dutch optics, right? Because it was the best Russia could build. 2nd generation Thales optics. Currently the 7th generation is being rolled by Thales in several western armies.
Fokka which isactually why acquiring domestic IC production capability is one major strategic goal on the economic side for defense. Russian state is currently straight of buying CPUs, signal processors etc. from domestic fabs just to have them domestically made by companies like Elbrus. Even though it would be cheaper to buy foreign. Because as with any other nation: national security. Ofcourse Russians have catching up to do. However given the requiments of military use (which are actually pretty low for modern ICs and have more to do with hardening than processing power) and pace of development I don't think the gap is as big as people think. Also partly it is economics. Russia has domestic IC fabs (which more than what many other nations have), so push comes to shove they can supply domestically. However it is cheaper and faster to say buy from Chinese fab. However I would think the end goal is to build the scale and range of domestic ICs and other components to the point where all military critical stuff is domestically supplied. Similarly with critical optics equipment like buying CCDs from domestic fabricators like ELAR. Russia CAN make this stuff domestically. Mostly it is about scale and price.
Russians are increasingly buying electronics from China; friend of mine is a plant manager of an electronics company with factories in Guangzhou and Shenzhen, he says they're getting lots of Russian orders in recent years.
China makes cheaper solutions. In most cases cheap Chinese PLC works just fine and gives you enough for that job. You don't have to buy 5 or 6 times more expensive Siemens.
+Enemy Of Freedom I mean. I was trying to give them half a chance. Then all this shit happened. I will concede that our government is super fucked-up all around, and that I didn't trust Hillary or Trump, and that Congress is broken, and that I distrust both political parties. But. Russia's interference through their mis-information campaign really doesn't inspire trust in them either.
Really good video. Can I ask you why you chose this topic? It's a really interesting one since the Russian military has a poor reputation in the west and most view it through a political lens, either painting Russia as evil or good and often going so far to call Russians as a people bad/evil by nature. I like that you maintain a strong neutrality in this video for that reason, for the same reason I really enjoy your videos relating to Russia or USSR and feel confidence that you examine the subject objectively.
What is your learned opinion of that new, high tech wonder tank the T-14 Armata? It's supposedly heavily automated (Automata) and only has a crew of 3 with a sort of mini Aegis system to protect it against anti-tank missiles.
There was an article I read recently talking about how it would be difficult to get Germany to a 2% of GDP figure for military expenditure. They were making the case that, while Germany could buy new equipment, they'd have a lot of cash left to burn and not a lot of additional manpower to employ. I thought that was interesting and that it would be neat to see a video on the current state of the German military (so I wouldn't have to do the heavy reading myself).
It would have been interesting to find out how the US-Side actually judged Russia‘s real capabilities in this cited report, if they even rendered a judgement that can be tested against real events. Clearly as of May 2022, the superficial appearance of Russian forces and their assumed capabilities (including how they presented themselves) have not aged well. Or maybe we should conclude that strategic and technical doctrines need to be taken with a lot more salt than we have in the past. Just because a country comes up with a doctrine for everything and assigns a weapon system to fulfill that role doesn‘t mean it actually works that way in practice. And not just when Russia does it, the same can apply to the super-powers as well…after all, the USA also thought they had perfected counterinsurgency warfare (again), but it turns out the insurgency can still win regardless. Or, as seen from the political side: it‘s still not feasible in the long to maintain an occupation of a foreign area where the majority of people want you to leave; pretty much no matter who you are.
You could have cited a few numbers of units (manpower, number of tanks, ships, planes etc) to give a sense of scale at the very end. It would give some perspective (vs forces of other countries and such).
when did Russia published it's new National Security Strategy? adding social media to the "New Threats" it's telling, after what happened in 2016 US election.
Yeah...not the Arab spring at all, who would ever suspect that after several dictators were overthrown and communication went via social media that it's a threat, alongside the riots in the US. Organization of domestic terror organizations such as Antifa
The Russians are an interesting case of what should be a strong but regional power that possesses the arsenal and worldview of a superpower. If it weren't for their nuclear arsenal they would not be much of a threat to NATO, even with their large (at least on paper) military. Their equipment is crude and outdated compared to Western systems (with the notable exception of their excellent missiles) and their troops are typical conscript quality with a severely lacking NCO corps. They have had issues supplying even small forces in close proximity, such as in Ukraine and Georgia. Their power projection in Syria isn't very impressive. Somewhat ironic is the fact that much of the Soviet nuclear arsenal was based in Ukraine when the USSR collapsed. Ukraine gave the nukes to Russia in exchange for a promise that Russia (and other states including the US) would protect Ukraine's national sovereignty. That was a bit of a mistake.
> They have had issues supplying even small forces in close proximity, such as in Ukraine and Georgia Err, what? >Their power projection in Syria isn't very impressive. comparing with who? >Somewhat ironic is the fact that much of the Soviet nuclear arsenal was based in Ukraine when the USSR collapsed. somewhat ironic, that it is a absolute crap
It would not had mattered. Nukes is non important factor in Crimea occupation. As for Russian military, you are wrong. Russian military is capable of destroying entirety of European Nato side. Numbers have quality of its own and huge numbers of equipment is a challenge to face as it is. In your arrogance you make typical academical mistake and wrongly evaluate military fighting capabilities.
Ukraine would have failed to keep its nuclear arsenal in order. While it inherited a many nukes, it didn't have the resources or installations to maintain it.
woodruff42 I don't particularly care, it's just a grammar thing and rarely is there any malicious intent behind the word. It's like, here we still call blacks negroes, but we don't see any connotations to that word unless educated on its use in the US.
woodruff42 So what? English isn't their language, you don't see us bitching about how they speak Ukrainian. Besides, their country's name literally means "Borderlands", and in english you say "I am from *the* borderlands", not "I am from borderlands".
woodruff42 That article proves my point, we have multiple "the [country's name]" in use in the english language, no one is questioning the sovereignty of *the* Netherlands, but we still use "the" when we talk about *the* Netherlands. Not to mention *the* Philippines, *The* Gambia, *the* Congo, *The* Bahamas, *the* Maldives, *the* Seychelles, *The* Dominican Republic, and even the uncommon *the* Sudan! Hell, Ukrainian doesn't even have an equivalent of *"the"* in their own language! *They shouldn't even have the gall to criticise our use of our own damn language!* English is not an artificial language, the native speakers deserve as much rights to their language as Ukrainians have to theirs, you don't see English-speakers forcing Ukrainians to adopt definite articles now do you? Foreign, non English-speaking countries shouldn't be allowed to politicise the english language to suit their geopolitical desires, we have enough propaganda flooding our media, we don't need *the* Ukraine dumping more into the cesspool, why don't they bother Russia if they're so troubled about their sovereignty! If Ukrainians are *so God damned upset* with our use of the definite article they damn well change their name from " *THE* Borderlands" to either Ruthenia, or Malorossiya. Either way, stop bothering the Anglosphere with your bullshit!
Conscription of men between 18 and 27 you mentioned is often dodged by bribery or otherwise so you can't count on 100% men having any training (however it was close to in soviet era). Also you must account for multi-national composition of RF (that's a better term than "Russian") forces. Some will show higher morale than others based on tensions between ethnic groups. Same goes for emergency mobilization: some regions will probably dodge it more willingly than others based on traditions and their social/economic situation - i.e. a highly indoctrinated, but poor regions will consider army a good "job", while others will think of it as a sinkhole for misfits from previous example and avoid at all costs. It's been partially countered by providing high bonuses for emergency operations (like invasion in Ukraine and expeditionary forces in Syria) allowing even low-ranks to buy a decent car (a fit they would probably never achieve by other means). However it can't be applied on a massive scale because of the economics and would be a benefit only for fast response units or mercenaries (sometimes the difference is non-existent).
The idea that Russia did something wrong in the Crimea is strickly untrue, It already had a paid for agreement with Ukraine for a set nuber of troops in that area. At the time of the internal conflict, paid for by America and certain members of Europe to create the problem to start with, there were only half the number of troops there than allowed for in the paid for agreement with the Ukraine, so the addition was only to bring the number up to full levels, as agreed by Ukraine and admitted by them, despite the inability of the truth to be reported to the western world which continues to this day. It should have been pointed out by any unbios reporting that the problem has been created by Americas breaking of the NATO agreement held at Yelta in which it was stated that no NATO country would move one inch closer to the Russian boarder. The common statement made by the west today is that Somehow Russia is the agreesor, because it has moved the whole country closer to Europe, a statement that is as stupid as it is offencive, Russia has stuck to the agreement , even though it is not part of NATO, it is the western powers that insist on ignoring the agreement and moving both troops and armament right up to the Russian boarder, all Russia has done is move its troops close to their own boarder on their own land, not on someone elses. It is also worth mentioning that Russia has stated time and time again that it wants nothing more than peace and considers the western idea of a war as both totally out of the question for both its own safety and that of Europe, a statement which seems to fall on deaf ears despite being voiced at every major meeting held by world powers pointing out that war only fills the pokets of the arms dealers in the world?
I remember when I and my mom went on military exhibition with helicopters, missiles, jets, etc. then I went a bit further, where area was restricted with barbed wire and signs. there were one Su33, one Su37 and wing of Su47. the soldier asked ge to gtfo since that was TOP SECRET AREA. I was very young and told him about wiki info and plastic models of those jets. his face was prices less just use wiki or play Wargame Red Dragon, where the core of russian army is 90% accurate. though I still have worm fillings towards my motherland, our army is just a joke compare to the might of Soviet Army. do not worry western bros, slavs would not go offensive. well maybe after some nukes....
Could you tackle the case of the french army and its current debbacle in modernisation ? China or saudi arabia could be interesting because of their strange way of handling high command and hierarchy Edit : if you are interested in studying the french army check out the white book or le livre blanc which sums up all of the upcomming reforms and shift in doctrins
I have some Russian in my Blood. so I find this video very interesting and also I appreciate it very much. Anything about parts of my heritage will always make for a very good watch. As always very excellent video well done Sir.
Gautier Walter I was just joking. I respect anyone who served in any military branches. If I make fun of your military than means I respect it. For if you can't make fun of your military or yourself you will be offended at any drop of a hat. Good day to you, for you just ruined my joke to make people laugh. Anyway may we have a civil dispute if you disagree with me and my humour.
Great presentation. As an American I'm more worried about China and the PLA capabilities. Being I European I get why you're more wary of Russia but could you do or point me towards the relevant material for a similar understanding of Chinese military capabilities?
i know that the Soviet womble is the old image of the Russian Military however it would have been nice for you to have a lil point about the "little green men" that came out as the image after Crimea.
I love how all these westerners say that "everything they know about Russia and Russia's military is all true", but they haven't even been in that country (I haven't also). I am waiting for a legit russian soldier to really explain what's really happening to Russia.
Could I ask for a video by you, good sir, on how Space information affects modern combat, versus the radio that was used primarily in that role in ww2 and the early cold War?
