Ukraine: is this Just Arrogance? 

germans complaining means nothing as ukraine has no air support and cant apply nato combine arms tactics without air power. what ukraine is doing is adapting using small unit probing attacks to draw out russian artillery to take it out. from reports from russian military blogger murz, he said russiand retreated out of staromaiorsk because ukraine destroyed the 20 artillery pieces russians were using to support staraomaiorsk. with no air power, ukraine has to use the same playbook of kherson of taking out russian equipment and logistics, and we are seeing the fruits of that now with russian positions callapsing due to ukraine taking out russian artillery, fuel , ammo, supplies command posts and troop concentrations in rear.

the german strategy would have led to astronomical losses as they would have been stopped at the huge mine fields and hits by artillery, helos and jets. its why ukraine switched to small unit probing attacks to identify and target russian positions, artillery before demining the fields to move forward. cant use combined arms with no air support and huge mine fields.

Well, what was the NATO training before the paradigm was changed to "Worldwide Policing Operations"? It was basically for Bundeswehr to fill the "Fulda Gap", the estimated favorite axis of an assumed Russian advance, and then be obliterated in a nuclear blast together with Allied Troops when they arrived there. Everybody knew, if that scenario of open war along the Iron Curtain ever happened, it would escalate to a strategic nuclear exchange real quick. So all the reasoning about Combined Arms Warfare was moot anyway. There was a saying amongst German soldiers at the time: "The role of the Bundeswehr is to duck down and wait until real soldiers arrive", which was a little overestimating the superpowers of American troops imho, but whatever...it would not matter in the end. Because it would have been game over for both sides and the rest of the planet.

Can you do an episode on the evolution of attack drones pls?

Hello friend, I am new to you, but as you are about my age, do you remember a sci-fi show called Babylon 5? Well, when it comes to the name of your video here, I will leave you with the words of Ambassador Londo Mollari, because, it's not just arrogance. "Ah, arrogance and stupidity in one convenient package, how efficient of you." He said it aid to the leaders of a military power that were biting off more than they could chew by making entirely unnecessary enemies of far older giants. Scifi has many lessons within. Killing a generation for the profits of capitalism via NATO expansion. If there is a God my friend, then God help those that destroyed every opportunity for peace due to it being far less profitable than the sacrifice and destruction of a nation.

**except for how they'll look with those extra bars on their dress uniform and resume.🤭

Well, falling in line politically also helps.😊

@@Veldtian1 yeah, all soldiers are girly like that 😉

You forgot one important factor: WODKA! (& COCAINE)

That's pretty much all of NATO. They've only ever fought far smaller and inferior forces in the past several decades.

Indeed. Ukraine is expected to fight a NATO style war without all of the NATO assets.

You are almost there, but. the real elephant in the room is the deadly long range Russian air defence and offence. Overlooking that is a testament to institutional dumbness.

Air superiority won't de-mine the fields, bruv.

That is not going to be achieved against Russian air defense. This isn't Libya we are talking about.

@@TrixieTheGreat mines are so powerful. I wander how ww2 would turn around if there were mines... wait, there were mines.

They will kill zelensky because Russia needs zelensky alive mark my words

They are slowly trying to shift the narrative, they spent the entire year claiming that Russia is losing Now they are slowly pivoting to Ukraine is losing so that when Ukraine eventually loses these news companies can retain credibility

It is a good sign indeed 😅

what blame game?

No it hasn't

The M830A1 HEAT rounds have multi-purpose warheads which are used to defeat armored vehicles, helicopters and soft targets such as bunkers. The cartridge is black with yellow markings, weighs 49.2 lb (22.3 kg), with the projectile accounting for 25.1 lb (11.4 kg), and has a length of 38.74 inches (98.4 cm) It is capable of engaging helicopters thanks to its dual-purpose fuze that offers impact or proximity modes. The M830A1 was first fielded in 1994 The idea that there is only 1.7 kg of HE is just silly... and it is multipurpose round...

The two versions have 1 and 3 kg WARHEADS not HE weight. The 1 kg version essentially has the same warhead as RPG-26 granting it 440 mm of RHA penetration. The 3 kg version has similar warhead to PG-7VR and RPG-27/29, with over 650 mm penetration behind Kontakt-1 ERA.

The lancet’s warhead is the KZ6 demolition charge, an old soviet device. It’s a heat warhead with about 215mm of armor penetration. If you hit the thin metal on the roof of tanks then yes, it should penetrate, but it’s not really powerful enough to destroy the tank in one hit.

In any case why should Russia waste artillery shells if its drones are up to the task. There was a time, last summer , when Western analysts blamed Ukraine for indiscriminate use of munitions. The rest is history.

@@eugeniusbcmumba3710 "In any case why should Russia waste artillery shells if its drones are up to the task." Redundancy is good sometime, and Redundancy is also what the Military love to invest to to avoid one part of the tactic or system to stall when "the basket that placed all the eggs dropped by accident or by intent", especially when Damage assessment requires immediate follow-up response and drone arrival to the combat zone might take time.

There is a reason why they haven't even dared invade Iran.

Theh have in the face of russia and china. Russia cant take on the entirety of nato, putin has said it himself bur they cant defenetly take on the european part of nato.

​@@Kayzef2003because iraq brought so many negative publicity?!

@@Kayzef2003 because it was not worth it? why would anyone want to invade iran when they are just minding their own business with their religeous zealotery? its not like iran is invading ukraine rn or something, even if they are supplying some hideously loud drones that are gepard food.

​@@toninhosoldierhelmet4033also before they reach tehran there would be a slaughter of western soldiers. have you seen the topographic map of iran? it's mountain for days

Basicaly however they dont need 100 days of bombing they usualy start the massive bombing campaign in the first days, jets and bombers flying sorties day and night

give an real life example of that and not some shit you have day dreamed about

Haha

@@BR-it2qe iraq. Watch the video of the channel GDF he uses actual statistics, the amount of ordinance droped on the country is staggering. Literlay the first day of the invasion on the 19th was just a massive bombing campaign, the troops began to move next day

5. ONLY attack enemies that are substantial weaker! This is actually the FIRST Rule

That was my first taught when I heard od "nato" trainers training Ukrainians. Nato has zero experience in wars such is this one.

​@@Rb-dh3lttraining in NATO doctrine is different than Vets of the War on Terror instructing counter insurgency, something Ukraine is already quite good at. The "Training" in question is the NATO Rapid Doctrine, which was designed to fight the Soviet Union/Russia. Plus turning the Ukrainian military from it's old Soviet model to a NATO standard, which one of the factors why they survived so long. But I think both the media as well as SOME members of NATO, such as Germany aren't understand the strange reality where both land and sky are No Man Lands, which is rare, literally only Russia and Ukraine are currently dealing with such a deal. But yea there are undoubtedly members of the alliance who forget that their combined Airpower alone is the main factor in why they could move rapidly.

Also to the OP, I wouldn't call the Jihadist unsuspecting, they just lacked shit to shoot down jets rather than helicopters

Sheer hubris and arrogance coming from the West who've been fighting goat herders wearing bed sheets and using AKs and RPGs. Sun Tzu teaches to know yourself and know your enemy, but the West keeps painting their "enemy" as cartoon villains. Meanwhile Ukrainians are paying the ultimate price for the West's arrogance/stupidity.

@@commiemeth I heard that they had the Islamic Charles Xavier who was basically their reconnaissance tool.

No. The people promoted in the US are exactly the right people. Right gender, right skin colour, right religion... The list of criteria is really long.

That was my comment. In the good old days, having been in a combat area was a high multiplier towards promotions. Ofc if you sat at Bagram in an office, you saw about as much combat as in DC so the last 20 years really degraded this idea. Combined with DEI as rosomak said, the current leadership is exactly that: Good at ticking boxes, terrible at leading troops. just look at the withdrawal from the rockpile.

@@donaldduck830 There is no perfect system. I remember reading anecdotes of Vietnam-era officers "leading" troops into combat (death) just so they can get their "experience" points. We have to find a balance of experience and academics.

@@rosomak8244 Yeah I'm sure the REAL problem is "wokeness" real fucking giant brain take here

@@guitarazn90210 Yes. Watch "Steiner- The Iron Cross". The new company commander explicitly rotated in to get some combat experience and get a medal, without being able to lead the company. Or "Band of Brother": The original commanding officer was excellent in training, but Winters was the far better combat commander. It is difficult to find such a balance, but I would listen to somebody who actually had a clue and not to somebody who never fought any wars and whose parents and grandparents lost wars spectacularly.

Also drones have good range - 40km and can be closer to the front line or right on the line of control or even in the gray zone. Artillery has to be a bit back.

that's not what is happening, thats a childish simplification, all branches are working at the same time, theres no silly "trap".

If I understand this correctly NATO doctrine has a heavy emphasis on air support If they were to fight Russia they'd need a period to learn how to fight such a conflict (they'd need an actual industry base though...) People forget that mighty as the west is they've not engaged in a real war since Vietnam which didn't include the entirety of nato

They did try those tactics in the beginning of this offensive and it proved costly so they switched back to their own tactics, now it seems the west is pressuring then to do the same tactics that proved costly.

@@elliotyourarobot I think any tactic would be costly against a country with such overwhelming artillery/drone/air force advantage we're beginning to see videos of lancet's against squads of soldiers Looks like the idea that the reason we saw less usage of the Russian air force until recently was due to good air defense is true Edit: I've not seen any videos of lancet's hitting dismounted infantry I heard that from Scott Ritter I thought I should make that absolutely clear in case it turns out I misunderstood what he said

Everyone is somehow buying in to thinking that soldiers should kind of a university degree before they are ready. 3 months of serious training is enough for a regular grunt.

@rosomak8244 3 months is just long enough to get them adjusted to start the real training.

TRUE

Add the Ka52 copters to the mix, which are the ones doing the finishing off frequently. And of course there is already a newer version of the Lanced introduced with a stronger effective head.

@@rosomak8244 Oh yeah. Completely forgot about the Ka-52's.

lmao this is bullshit, literally

Very well said.

Just think Russian is even worse…..

​@@nkosipwlhow is it worse when they are winning moron

U can blame modern Western business management strategies like lean 6 sigma... Minimize variation (or errors), maximize efficiency, reduce costs. There is no room for "personal experience" or variation. Besides a puppet army fighting for the interests of their Western imperialist masters can't be expected to win.

@@nkosipwl not worse, though still bad in this regard

Iraq had a massive amount of air defense and the f 16 did its job still.

​@@TheRealAb216mostly obsolete Soviet era SAMS, and 90% was focused on Baghdad. And the US used a lot of cruise missiles and F117 strikes to soften them up before the main attack. And they still took losses.

@@mobius_1163 Iraq's SAMs were absolutely not obsolete for 1991. And while Russia has more advanced air defenses then Iraq did the US has far more advanced weapons and aircraft for the SEAD and DEAD missions then they did in 1991

I command your ability to think clear and critical.

The G-7 appears to assume they can wear down Russia economically, by using Ukrainian Citizens as cannon fodder.... The British expressed the same idea in 1853 and left a half million Troops buried in Balaclava. The effort to exploit the Planet has seen more examples of stupidity plundering Ukraine, as Empires from all points attempted to dominate the area between the Black Sea and the Baltic. We are witness to another, as the Women of Ukraine appear to bear the burden of watching Young Men go off to die. The G-7 appears to be running out of weapons, as well as money to pay Contractors who seem unable to pay the Humans needed to continue the conflict. Russia has been invaded before, they appear to have learned from the past. Hitler learned a valuable lesson, late in His life. The G-7 Leaders appear to fail to learn from Hitlers mistakes.

Afghanistan is a prime example of when your political figureheads preach BBB but do not mentions America in it .

​@@patriotenfield3276Afghanistan (also Iraq, Yemen, Libya etc) are examples of evil imperialist oppression & plunder.

Imperialism will never win.

I think it's getting rather evident that these days the "near peer" concept no longer exists. It wad used to reffer to Russia and China while not-so-subtly implying they still can't match up. The Ukraine proxy war has demonstrated that at a minimun Russia is very much a peer force and they will be sharing all the info they need to with China.

In fact, Ukraine should learn from the PLA how to defeat the US in North Korea

Were those military defeats ? Usually our stupid pacifists complain and when the media starts whining our politicians fault and reduce supply/take out forces. North Vietnam didnt exist anymore when the Vietnam war ended...

ERA not work to cumulative

The enlightened West. The block with all the potential to actually excel, that chooses to narcissistically rub their nipples in the face of the world while plunging from prosperity to degeneracy instead.

Yup, Western “advanced” tech weapons Always Win Wars 😂

@@dexlab7539Nato already won.

Col Macgregor thinks 600k casualties, which puts KIA in the region of 200k-250k KIA

Zelensky wanted to fight till the last abled Ukrainian.

@@z_actual The rate of wounded against killed there is 1.8 to 1. And it's already about 600k killed.

Now imagine if Lindsay Graham's "killing Russian's" comment applied to actual Ukrainians, the war would count as a raging success as he's often stated. So the joke is on who?

I think MacGregor said something about 350k dead and many more wounded seriously. Considering multiple sources report a little over 20,000 Russian army dead and 30,000 Wagner that's an exchange ratio of 7 to 1. Russia is bleeding but Ukraine is maimed. There's no way they can sustain that kind of losses, and we now see you cannot build army forces on the fly. It's time to end this butchery and admit defeat, for the sake of the Ukrainian people if nothing else.

I am much better, thank you!

Agree 100%! How come Ukrainians hardly ever use smoke grenades? And why do they not saturate the air and sky with a thick black wall of smoke from burning crude oil, when advancing. This really bothers my mind when it comes to the war in Ukraine.

And media announced Ukraine counter offensive plan like a movie trailer was not helping at all.

@@ringotran64 the UKR has been very a lot more successful on social media at portraying their success and undermining the Russsians' success. It bought them a flood of donated equipments (which they still keep complaining that they failed because it was not enough) and sacks of cash to keep their government running. On the other hand, as this channel's author say, it feels like they are being pushed to do this offensive to prove something. I always doubt it when people keep repeating that "Ukraine is winning the information space". Do they? Their operations are being orchestrated by the fucking Internet and social media. It's the same early narratives as the "Russia has not established air superiority ". Now that UKR is floundering and Russia has air superiority, those are suddenly quiet. We can call the UKR "counteroffensive" the "perpetual orgasm offensive". It's always coming, but never actually arriving. "It's coming, it's coming, it's gonna come". I argued with absolute cretins who laps up every single propaganda line dripping out of Zalushny's mouth. Or arm chair generals who writes in very abstract and convincing sounding ways that "no, this is just a diversionary attack for the main thrust", that never comes. It was coming, for sure.

The Russian complains about the command chain up and down subsided long ago. Now you have lancets directly combined with observation drones.

Just want to add that NATO "trained" Russia so well, that they are now using Lancets as counter artillery measure and taking out artillery when it tries to change position which is 10 times better than actual counter artillery routine. And that's just one example. NATO's "trainings" are a fucking joke. There is only one side they actually trained well - is Russia. And it's getting stronger by the day. They really expected demining equipment to be enough against mines.. for fucks sake.. NATO is nothing in comparison to Ukraine in terms of experience. It's Ukraine should be training NATO, not the other way around.. And when Russia is done with Ukraine, they will stay as #1 army on a globe simply due to enormous experience of real modern warfare which no one has. Not a single NATO country was ever attacked by cruise missiles. Russia was attacked by cruise missiles, and is now extremely well adapted to this as well. Do i need to mention their absolute EWS superiority to any NATO country. The EWS part caught everyone off guard. No one expected or even imagined it to be that fucking strong. Over 10,000 of drones per month lost to EWS according to RUSI's research. But it's just one example, the damage by EWS is so huge that it's hard to comprehend real scale. It nullified usage of JDAM, GLSDB munition and most of GMLRS. Even goes as far to interfere with guidance of Storm Shadow, which is why they captured at least one missile in perfect condition. As if it wasn't enough, now they are just flexing by blocking Starlink in Ukraine. The list just goes on. Not a single country on the globe has as much experience as Russia and Ukraine together. And after this war they will be in boiling rage with pure hatred towards NATO together. This will backfire.

While we can agree battlefield experience is a possitive for promotion this is not the whole picture. Winning a war needs institutionalism, strategy and doctrine this is all learned through training in a class room and studying. A person with experience in a battlefield dosnt mean much other maybe they are willing to do what it takes to win becuase they are already desensitized to the ruthlessness of war. But an idiot can have battle experience and lead a platoon into certain death. Its best to have both not one or the other and if anything its better to have strategy and knowledge then experience. As the old saying goes... "knowledge is power"

@@doesntmatter7739 This generic statement doesn't respond to anything in the video or to my comment lol. You a politician because you're really good at saying nothing.

@@DairyCat damn and you said a lot didn't ya?

​@@doesntmatter7739NCOs aren't going to determine anything bigger than a battle anyway, what's your point? Higher command obviously needs to keep their eye on the strategic and logistical goals, but all the NCOs have to concern themselves with is how to take that next ridge, and practical experience is usually more useful than theoretical knowledge at that level.

@@toninhosoldierhelmet4033 If you came to that conclusion it means you cant read or think.

I saw that video too. It was a combination of recklessness, heroism, bravery, luck and stupidity. It pan out well for the tankists though.

@@hackmind Soviets did that many times during WW2, Afghanistan etc. It's in the blood. That's why I'm saying that the "NATO tactics" might not be a right tool for the job.

And judging by the comments here by people who have no idea what the F they are talking about, Russian inflence ops are highly effective.

Yes, but one side lies and is LOSING! That’s all that matters. Remind us again who’s land is missing??

Currently, it's a leak of info from a single Western news outlet. Of course, everyone needs to take a big grain of salt. Not to mention this leaked info often is backed with a political motive, not nessicarily under Russian influence, but also different NATO member isn't really on the same page. The info is dismissed by other NATO member military personnel, but also not officially, some even use words like "typical German arrogance". You can only play guessing game with all these "unofficial statements", because these things aren't something that can be fact-checked, and almost always won't be really officially replied by the other side.

There is no such thing as common NATO tactics. Everyone is just doing their own thing more or less emulating the US army. But every NATO army has his own peculiarities in this regard.

@@rosomak8244 That's what I am saying.. Hey, Leopard tanks, Bradleys etc etc..all work by different systems.. Each designed differently.. not to mention, need different forms of repairs.. Such varieties confuses soldiers in times of War..you can't be reading books when missiles and bullets are firing at you

There is plenty of incidental materials about that. And if anything one doesn't hear Russian soldiers complaining about lack of those anymore.

Drones like Lancet can't replace artillery, these 2 are completely different things. Lancet is used to destroy air defense systems or artillery and light armored vachiles and for heavy armored vachiles it mental to immobilize, so later heavy artillery can finish it off. When it comes to drones like b bayraktar, bayraktar drone proved to be useless against enemy that has air defense

Artillery is still needed to suppress and its general area effect

​@@georgefenrirbitadze4757that is correct. Bayraktar only good to fight third-degree armies with no or poorly managed air defense, as was the case in Karabakh.

@@Intourist. People don't understand that bayraktar drone was created to fight Kurdish separatists, terrorists in Syria or Countries without good air defense, I don't understand why Ukrainians thought bayraktar was a good weapon for this war but I guess same goes for leopards

Let me know how it goes!

Simply put: electronic warfare. Oth sides lose drones to that, but Russians have ability to take out Ukrainian EW posts and drone command posts, which they do regularly. Also their SIGINT is vastly superior to Ukrainian, so their break into Ukrainian drone control far more

These are 2 very different drones that are used in very different ways.

​@@ilililiiiiiiiil3265problem is fpv drones make switchblade redundant

Volume and the amount of support involved. Lancets are only a part of russian drone warfare complex, a produced in significant numbers and are quickly adapted/bugfuxed and Putin's mafia state has deep pockets. Switchblades are gifted in relatively small amounts and are not improved as rapidly.

Lancet 3 is smaller man portable drone that is made in mass - maybe 100 per day. Switchblade is a huge drone, expensive, and produced in very low numbers. Lancet 52 is more similar to switchblade but also will be made in like 10x quantity. Ukraine mostly uses civilian drones with some explosives' duct taped to them.

Listening to a Britt? They have been the chief cheerleaders for UA and one of the main sources of propaganda against RU. To the British, it seems that anyone who tries to be slightly neutral would be a traitor.

Or something acknowledging the situation, seeing that they are making costly assumptions and mistakes to force a rethink. Daniel Ellsberg was accused of many things for the leaks Same Snowden or Manning. They want to create awareness but the gov in its arrogance instead of self criticize they turn into they must be in concert with some power. See the pattern?

I think it's obvious enough that Ukraine is getting its @ss handed to it in this offensive, so I doubt it takes a Russian sleeper cell in Germany to present an image of frustration and disarray on the side of NATO. After all, Ukrainian troops interviewed by Western MSM said it themselves. "When we asked them what to do when we come up against minefields, they told us to simply drive around them"

Russian drone/missile production could be crippled with some well placed cruise missile strikes, but USA forbids this. Could have supplied some of those to Ukraine and Russia would indeed turn out to be a paper tiger. But they don't want to end this quickly.

​@@noop9kUkraine can be turned into a paper tiger by Russia nuking the whole EU. The problem is that of course it would trigger a nuclear war upon the world. Same outcome in the rather stupid assumption of yours.

Wagner mercenaries are better equipped than the average Russian conscript. Wagner took 10 months and self admittedly lost 25,000 men for a city with less than 100k population and no strategic value. I wouldn't call that a victory. Russia is scraping the bottom of the barrel with their manpower extending the age of service to 65, the average lifespan of a Russian male. The Russian army is a joke to the world and can't win a war that they started on the doorstep of their own border

yeah sure, russia has been so succesful in the past with it's conflicts, ok everyone is going to take you at face value.

@@toninhosoldierhelmet4033yes and no. Russia isn’t exactly a brilliant military. But America military isn’t either, the latter have a better propaganda arm (hollywood). However you must also evaluate that for every russian move there is a reaction comprised of several countries undermining such move. What is lesser discussed is that 32-33 countries combined with billions spent waging a proxy war manage to stall one country rather than defeating it.

is that what Western propaganda said? That there were NATO forces on one side and convict with shovels on the other side? Or you just combining 2 untrue statements as it is convenient to you? Let's just present what looks good for you and call it "truth". And yes, Bakhmut was success except it took 10 months , big losses , and city is no more.

@@hackmind the real question is, why russia has so little friends? if you think that this is western black mailing, why russia just doesn't employ the same tactics? well the balkans never seen to be happy with russia even tho they have zero ties with western society outside of some EU influence, georgia in particular really dislikes russia.

OMG they are the Finest Weapons in the entire World!!!….don’t get me started on their Shovels 😂

No, it is not. If Ukraine would have nuclear arms then it might be.

That's assuming that someone's going to use nuclear weapons, but I doubt that. So this is actually the 1st modern peer conflict since WW2@@harleyquinn8202

@@harleyquinn8202 cope

@@harleyquinn8202 Russia is at war with the entire nuclear-armed West. Ukraine is just supplying cannon fodder. Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Iraq, and Afghanistan were not serious peer conflicts.

@@ViceCoin "Russia is at war with the entire nuclear-armed West" - So far it is still a proxy war. But with Russia economically drifting away from Europe more and more, closer to China, eventually that war might stop being just proxy. For that all Russian economical ties with the West need to be cut off. It is very slowly moving toward that goal.

cant do maneuver warefare when you have to go through heavily mined fields. they tried in the begining and russians used helos. its why ukraine using small units to probe and draw out russian artillery then destroy the russian artillery with counter battery before demining fields and moving forward.

@@giovanni-ed7zq True, but if they can blind the defenders by neutralizing drones, mine clearing can be carried out more rapidly and with reduced risk.

@@petesheppard1709 its why ukraine adapted and went to small unit probing attacks to take out russian artillery and degrade positions before demining and moving forward. minimizes casualties. i doubt nato armies could get through those mine fields without air support without huge casualties. its what the ukrainian small units are doing, minimizing casualties but moving forward at a slower pace while russian supplies destroyed in rear along with russian artillery. as time goes on, low on ammo and fuel and supplies like you are seeing now with no artillery support, the russians have to fall back. its the kherson playbook.

@@giovanni-ed7zq Lol Russian artillery isn't getting destroyed, Ukraines big guns are being destroyed by drones and lancets who have 70km range far outranging Ukraines longest ranged guns like archer and crab Artillery range is 20km - 40km Ukraine's foot soldiers and armor then get wrecked by Russian artillery, and they die in confusion wondering why ukranian artillery isn't firing, their DJI consumer drones which have 20km range are also easily downed by EW Soldiers would never willingly go on a suicide mission, so Ukraine lies to them, tells them to push ahead and superior NATO artillery will destroy Russian artillery at 20km - 40km , but the reality is that Russias lancets are operating at 70km+

Combined arms and flooding are ineffective in Ukrainian terrain. The Civ Div channel uploaded several videos showing foreign volunteers leading a failed counter-offensive. In dense forest areas, visibility is limited to 1 meter, making it challenging for both infantry and armored columns to operate effectively. They are unable to determine if they are being shot at or if it's friendly fire. Regarding wounded soldiers, NATO doctrine may not adequately address the challenges they face. In large-scale attacks, even a 10% casualty rate creates burdens, with everyone having to perform medic duties while waiting for evacuation. This diverts vehicles from their primary task of advancing, as they are used to evacuate the wounded. Additionally, a hit tank removed from action affects the entire column, as crew members need evacuation. It seems that NATO may view wounded soldiers as mere statistics in a spreadsheet, NATO rush tactics can works in case if Ukraine can leave wounded soldiers on the field or just finishing them off and then move forward. I’m just armchair general but looking at Civ Div videos it looks as it require one CASEVAC be ready for every 10 soldiers deployed to fully evacuate wounded soldiers in no time, this is why small assaults tactic which Ukraine using works the best. For big assault it will require hundreds if not thousands of CASEVAC evacuating wounded.

When Russia and Ukraine are united it will have the most experienced combined military.

@@harleyquinn8202 Are you anticipating a unification of the Russian Federation and Ukraine perhaps through a referendum, or annexation of the whole of Ukraine by the Russian Federation? Perhaps Ukraine will annex the Russian Federation. What's your thinking? Personally I think Crimea and the four areas now incorporated into the Federation will be the extent of it, with some possibility of negotiation over Odessa and even Kharkiv. I think Belarus becoming part of the Russian Federation is not out of the question.

Well the ukrainains are scraping the barrel for a long time now with their famous forceful mobilisation of man. Which results in lower quality of their troops (lower than it already was dew to short training time) and a moderate increase in surrender rates. The russians even set up a special frequency for those that want to surrender they need to tune into that frequency and say the word ,,Volga" they will have to come out of their positions with a white flag and either with their hands in air or without a weapon.

"Should things continue as they are there won't be a Ukrainian armed force, let alone an experienced one."

@@ObeyNoLies I don't think things are quite there yet.

Its a proxy war. But you got a point. When western former soldiers with experience in Iraq or Afghanistan go. They return saying that this is another level never seen by them.

@hackmind Yes , i know, proxy war and all - but it sounded to me like the nco's or whomever it was from nato , were implying they would have done it better, when in reality , as you said , they don't really know more about this different kind of war either. so what is the point of receiving the so much hyped up training from the people that have no experience or knowledge about the current war ? And then have the audacity to blame the soldiers for not following their instructions that were wrong for the occasion to begin with ... It seems like a better idea for Ukraine would be to have their own veterans, with a first hand experience engaged in training...

Talk is cheap and safe. That's why. The Germans have also got to vent their anger over all their wrecked toys somehow. And since they can't complain about Uncle Sam forcing them towards economic suicide over his beloved proxy war, they vent on the Ukrainian troops instead.

Thank you to you!

This is ammunition, not an aircraft. Folded dimensions have a high priority. Several small wings give a more compact design when folded.

Most likely it is made like this in order to have higher speed at the terminal phase of the attack, when Lancet dives to the target at 45-60 degree angle. Two longer wings may break off or create too much lift for precise diving.

i suppose single wings would need to be longer so 4 shorter wings instead of 2 long. and if wings are completely the same extra cost is small

It's kind of like a double-decker aircraft. And of course this is about maneuverability. What else?!

IMHO the point of the design is to improve lateral control when tracking targets. Instead of doing 'banks-and-yanks', lancets can simply yaw with same or similar authority to its pitch control to move laterally, simplifying its control and improving maneuverability. Just imagine it like a true missile would in flight

@@doesntmatter7739 So tell us how NATO trains seeing that you have superior inside knowledge and furthermore I ain’t a chief nor even aiming to be one but just a simple,….yes that word, commentator!

​@@doesntmatter7739🤡🤡🤡

No way in hell you will be able to gather any serious material in this regard in the open. All you will find will be spades and loads of disinformation at best.

Yes - that would be fantastic!!

why? it's gonna be biased anyway lol

There is an M version being tested. It seems that the upgrades are mostly avionics so far. The new engine should also improve the duct configuration a bit (it should be shorter). Nothing specific about stealth.

Based on which actual record are you assuming that it is good for fighting insurgences?

Ehhhhhh... the Taliban did defeat NATO. So its 50/50 on the Insurgency thing.

​@@pilotman9819not militarily

​​@@rosomak8244 I guess Iraq after occupation? Cause Taliban won, ISIS was killed by Iran, Russia, and Syria mostly, and Iraq 2 was against a shell of an army wrecked by internal bullshit

​@@dave_sic1365 the goal of the US was to destroy the Taliban and occupy Afghanistan (and steal their resources, but that is for another day) The goal of Taliban was to not allow that, and to kick the US and it's Lackeys out of Afghanistan. If you fail to achieve your objectives on the battlefield, and your enemy succeeds, that means they beat you militarily.

Yes. This is another variation of the notorious "Adolf was meddling" excuse of the otherwise "genius" german generals in their memoirs. They where the best except they lost.

Still would not agree with idea that combined arms do not work against peer level opponent. They work, when implemented. Issue here is that Ukrainians lack major parts of combined arms formula to even try to implement it and gain successe they seek.

I agree, it seems very likely that anyone with high level intel has a better idea of the future of the conflict than we do. They will start covering for themselves long before the public gets wind of the conflict winding down.

You do understand that the Ukrainians have been training with NATO advisors since at least 2008 and in the case of their air force, since the late 1990s with the California Air National Guard?

Keyboard warrior.

There are no failures. The Ukraine army has a finite number of troops and no air cover. They are preserving their combat potential . What do you suggest they keep throwing men and machinery at these mine fields until they get through or run out.

@@michaelhannah5376 Lancets are detectable by sound and EM signature. There are EW measures being developed. Also, Lancets don't travel alone and the targeting/recon drones are slower and also detectable, though harder to defeat.

@@michaelhannah5376 who leaked to you Russia battle doctrine ? :D

They want to test their NATO tactics in the real world without using actual NATO forces

Exactly, Russia is shooting Ukraine in the front and NATO is shooting their back 😂

Not really. Their experienced units suffer too high mortality so the experience goes nowhere

Ukraine actually was willing to surrender the donbass but then butcha happened... This is ukraines decision and Nato alredy promised aid. theres no way out for us except a Ukrainian victory

@@dave_sic1365 A victory that was never likely. And it was not the Bucha hoax, but Boris Johnson who pulled the plug from the Istanbul agreement. And don't tell me NATO could not pull out in a minute. Or that Zelensky was even in charge. The goal he proclaimed to throw Russia out of Crimea was never realistic once Russia entered, it would have been though if Russia had not intervened. The goal of Crimea was longterm US strategy since the 90's, to cut Russian access to the Black and Mediterranean Seas. Large NATO "excercises" were scheduled from March 2022 on, and Ukraine was assembling an expeditionary corps of around 60k troops near Donbas. At that point, a fight was unavoidable, given NATO refusal to negotiate about neutrality. Had Russia waited any longer, it would have been in a much worse strategic position, and would have been confronted with NATO troops directly. Which would have literally meant WW3. Because Russia could never accept to have Crimea Base and Black Sea access stolen by NATO. That would have opened the path for destruction of NATO by Russia. Also, Ukraine's independence was based on it's neutrality and on Russia keeping the naval base on Crimea. Neutrality was even enshrined in it's constitution, but the US, like always, had to undermine legality and treaties, and overthrow the Ukrainian government for that purpose in 2014. The history of this conflict began long ago, not in 2022. A short attention span does not make your narrative right.

@@dave_sic1365 ... and then Boris the orangutan Johnson happened.

The surrender monkey reflex. It's pathological.

​@@dave_sic1365bucha is false flag orchestrated by Ukraine snd Britain

…powered by washing machine parts

These are not two different things, IMHO. You could rephrase this as, experienced soldiers are promoted and they keep doing what they know it is working and believe the NATO training is not as effective as their experience. Same concept.

@@Millennium7HistoryTech It is still not correct to phrase this as basically "The stupid Germans are complaining about experienced soldiers getting promoted." The way I understood it (again, the German media sources I skimmed might be wrong too), it was just a analysis that was aimed at making the training more effective. As long as I don't know exactly what the difference between what the Ukrainians are doing and what NATO is training them is, I can only speculate, but in general and in theory I think we also have to consider the following angle: If the Ukrainians are not using what they have been trained to do, how do we know what is more effective? You seem to operate on the assumption that NATO (or the German military specifically in this case) is just teaching the Ukrainians big scale maneuver strategy and tactics, that didn't work and now the Ukrainians are doing their own thing that works. I don't think it is that simple. I know that the German military is basically split in 2: You have the heavy spear point units which strictly adhere to the combined arms doctrine, using MBTs, SPGs and other heavy equipment, but the Bundeswehr has always recognized that you can not use the heavy stuff every time and in every environment, so they have a part of their military that operates outside of the combined arms doctrine. Those are the "Jaeger" units, light infantry that specifically trains to operate without the help of tanks and heavy artillery, doing ambushes and hit and run attacks and basically training for large scale guerrilla warfare. Every infantry unit that does not operate within the "heavy" combined arms part of the army thus is called "Jaeger". German paratroopers for example are called "Fallschirmjaeger" and not "Fallschirmspringer" as they were in the Wehrmacht and mountaineers are called "Gebirgsjaeger", meaning they too belong to that "outside combined arms doctrine" part of the Bundeswehr. The name means that they are specialized on those light infantry tactics outside of the combined arms doctrine, without the help of the "heavy metal". Still, light, independent infantry and heavy spear point units are both part of German doctrine and are supposed to operate side by side or together, if possible. That is why this narrative that the Germans only know combined arms maneuver tactics and only teach that to the Ukrainians doesn't really make sense and thus the Germans criticizing the Ukrainians for not stubbornly doing only that is highly unlikely. As far as I know there isn't really much Ukrainian infantry training happening in Germany because teaching them to use German equipment was prioritized while the regular infantry stuff is taught in the UK and the USA, but the people writing that military analysis are aware of how flexible, guerrilla style light infantry tactics work and when they make sense. During the war against ISIS it was German Jaeger instructors who were sent to the Middle East to teach Kurdish fighters guerrilla tactics against a superior enemy. The point being that light infantry tactics and guerrilla warfare is not just something I, some random nobody on RU-vid can just claim the German army knows how to do, it is actually baked into the basic, fundamental structure of the Bundeswehr since its inception in the 1950s. That is why Jaeger units exist and why they are different from "Panzergrenadiere" (mechanized infantry, which are the infantry element of the combined arms "heavy" part of the German army). So I'm not just pulling this out of my behind. If the Bundeswehr would really just know how to stubbornly do combined army maneuvering tactics that would actually mean they are ignoring the existence of half their army.

2 points: 1- back before the offensive started, NATO PR people were making a big deal about how they were deliberately choosing young Ukrainian soldiers, NCOs and officers with as little experience and training in the Ukrainian system as possible specifically so they could adopt the NATO offensive combined arms tactics better and not have them conflict with any previous training or experience. 2- i watched a german TV interview with a Ukrainian trainee in Germany who asked his German instructors how they deal with minefields. The German instructor saud they drive around them, aince minefileds are 200x100 meters. Then the Ukrainian pointed out to him that in Ukraine the minefileds stretch out for hectares and hectares, to which the german instructor didn't really have an answer.

@@MatoVuc Your anecdote about the German instructor not being able to perceive minefields bigger than 200x100 meters makes no sense. The German military itself trains to lay minefields larger than that. I think there are even old Bundeswehr training videos about that to be found on RU-vid. Look up the stats of the German mine laying vehicle "Skorpion". It was designed to lay mine fields 1500 meters long. You see how your story is hard to believe? And that the German military does not only slavishly use NATO combined arms doctrine I have explained in detail in my previous reply.

@@TrangleClol not anecdote a Ukrainian soldier who returned from Germany literally said this on Ukrainian news media 😂 seems Germany have no idea what they are doing themselves

Adolf Hitler: Hold mein bier. Also Adolf: Let's name our most prized floating wunderwaffen after the great statesman whose words I chose not to heed. But then again, he did send the Bismarck to its demise, to sink Bri'ish merchants and eventually fight the Brits alone in their own turf, with predictable results...

they would study them in the museum

Russian warriors have the best battle experience. They are successfully fighting NATO.

@@ConradAinger ok vatnik

@@draghoverde Not familiar with the term. But it certainly doesn't constitute an argument.

@@ConradAinger russians aren't fighting NATO in ukraine because NATO isn't in ukraine, that's my argument. russians successfully fighting NATO is russian propaganda

Or appeasing. It all depends on which side of the fence you are.

​@@rosomak8244 regardless of sides - this leads to more casualties, military civilians, infrastructure...

They didn't show them hasty mind clearing even. Wow, why am I not surprised.

@@stephensanford5273 However, the Ukrainians are smart, adapting to circumstances and learning from mistakes. But it's embarrassing that some German/western military people, that haven't experienced high intensity combat like this (as General Ben Hodges admits) make patronizing statements.

Lancet-chan: 😍😍😍😍 Leopard-kun:😨😨😨😨

Not really, we also critizise the lacking support for Ukraine.

@@dave_sic1365 how much more support to Ukraine? Whole NATO, plus Australia, Canada, Japan, South Korea, Israel, Marocco, Sweden, Norway, Finland, Georgia, UAE.... how much more "love" for Ukraine?? Maybe...not love for Ukraine, but anti-Russianism??

As a “Westerner” this channel is awesome - speaking truth to power

@@dexlab7539 no doubt. Awesome channel!

@@marioshadjikyriacou3381 maybe deliver the weapons Ukraine actually needs and allow them to attack targets inside Russia?! Ukraine is unable to bomb russian airfields with storm Shadow because Russia might not like it....

….but how will the ‘Big Guy’ get his 10% ???

And divide Ukraine

Is China on board with those sanctions? Cause if not then they're meaningless.

LOL nope, it’s made with Shovels and Washing Machine parts - the US told us so

They evil Yankee lives in your head rent-free.

NATO IS the reason for Ukraine’s failure

a country experienced in wars warning the ally that they are making wrong should be taken as help, not criticism. The wise listens, while the dumbfk gets reckt