This video was released by the Armenian Ministry of Defense on the first day of the 2020 Azerbaijan-Armenia war.
The Armenians released half a dozen of such gloating videos in the first three days of the war... and then none, because after three days 1/n
Azerbaijan had broken through Armenian minefields and defense lines and began to run circles around the hapless, incompetently led, shoddily equipped Armenians.
The reason I am showing you this video is to make everyone realize that the first days of an offensive are ALWAYS
2/n
the most difficult for an attacker.
In the first days defenders sit in their prepared positions behind by minefields, and still have all their tanks & artillery, still have ample ammunition, still have all their troops, still have functioning logistics, still have reserves.
3/n
An offensive needs to grind down these resources of the defender, before a breakthrough can be accomplished and exploited.
There are various ways to do this and all of them take time: the 1991 Gulf War ground campaign lasted just four days, because before its start coalition
4/n
aircraft had subjected Iraq for 38 days and nights to one of the most intensive air bombardments in military history.
We can't judge the success of the Kherson offensive now. The Second Battle of El Alamein looked like a disaster for the British for its first twelve days,
5/n
the Battle of Waterloo shaped up to be a disastrous British defeat until 4 pm in the afternoon. In Normandy the allies failed to achieve any of their goals on the first day and it took them 55 days to finally exhaust the Germans and break out from Normandy.
Every day now
6/n
Ukrainian troops degrade russian manpower, equipment, and logistics. We will know the outcome of the battle in a few days... when one side will run out of troops, ammo, logistics, and reserves.
The russians, whose supply lines run over the Dnipro bridges, which are pounded
7/n
relentlessly by HIMARS strikes, are likely to be exhausted first... but until then Ukraine will lose many troops, tanks and vehicles... but these losses tell us nothing about the success or failure of the Ukrainian offensive.
At this point no one can make an assessment about
8/n
the success or failure of the offensive - not even the russian general staff, not even the Ukrainian general staff.
So be patient. For now fighting rages and we don't know, which side has the upper hand in manpower and materiel.
I believe it to be the Ukrainians, because
9/n
they have more and better trained troops, Western precision weapons, higher morale, ample ammo supplies, and now also air support (thanks to American HARM missiles and Turkish TB2).
Once Ukrainian troops reach the Dnipro, we will now for sure. Until then: Слава Україні!
10/end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I am relaxed about the US ending the rotation of a light brigade through Romania.
Yes, it is bad optics and russia will use it for its propaganda, BUT two armored brigades, a combat aviation brigade, a division artillery, a division sustainment brigade, and a division HQ 1/4
continue to rotate to Poland and the Baltics.
Right now the:
• 3rd Infantry Division HQ (arrived in Poland 4 days ago - photo)
• 1st Armored Brigade, 1st Infantry Division
• 3rd Armored Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division
• 3rd Division Artillery
• 3rd Combat Aviation Brigade 2/4
are in Poland and the Baltics.
Ending the rotation of a light brigade to Romania is a far less bad than ending the rotation of the armored brigades. It is also understandable as the US Army's light divisions (10th Mountain, 25th Infantry, 82nd Airborne, 101st Airborne) are
3/4
Of course russia can quickly seize the Suwałki Gap and cut of the Baltics from the rest of NATO... but have you had a look at Kaliningrad's border and the flat dry country beyond?
There are 9 Polish brigades in that area (and 11 in reserve, with 4 more forming). Sure russia 1/5
could move 50,000+ men to Kaliningrad to secure the border or build a defence line along the Pregoła river... but those need to be supplied from Belarus, which also is easily invaded unless russia sends 50,000+ troops to secure its flank there. A buildup of 200,000+ russian
2/5
troops in Belarus would be noticed by NATO (and ordinary people in Belarus, who would upload 100s of videos of the arriving russians).
In summary the main risk isn't that russia suddenly seizes and fortifies the Suwałki Gap... the main risk is that russia starts building up
3/5
The North Atlantic - one of the key battles in a russia-Europe war.
If Europe is defeated here, which with Europe's current forces and capabilities, is almost certain to happen... then russia can nuke the UK without fear of retaliation.
This will be a unsettling thread:
1/40
This battle will be very different from the battles in the Black Sea and Baltic Sea, which I discussed in an early thread, which is linked below.
To understand the North Atlantic Battle we need to look at Imperial Germany's WWI submarine campaign,
2 days ago I did a thread about the reasons russia can't defeat Ukraine and yet is still a deadly threat to Europe and NATO (link to the thread the next tweet).
Today I will talk about three of the fronts of a russia-Europe war: 1) Black Sea 2) Baltic Sea 3) North Atlantic
1/36
These three fronts will be air and sea battles, while Finland and the Baltics will be air and land battles; about which I will talk in another thread in the coming days.
I do not believe the US under control of Trump or Vance would come to the aid 2/n
• russia has no chance to defeat Ukraine
• russia is a deadly threat to NATO and the EU
Both of these are true... because as of 2025 Ukraine fields a far more capable military than NATO's 30 European members combined (!).
Let me explain.
1/39
As of August 2025 russia fields more than 1,3 million troops; at least half of which are fighting in or against Ukraine.
Ukraine has an estimated 1 million troops... maybe even 1,1 million troops. NATO's European members have double that: some 2.2 million troops, but 2/n
(there is always a "but" with European militaries):
• with more than double the personnel European NATO members manage to field only 20% more combat brigades than Ukraine. Partly because Western navies and air forces are bigger, but mostly because in all European militaries 3/n
People forget that for most if its history Europe was much, much more militarized than even during the Cold War.
Italy, from the end of the Third War of Independence in 1866 to 1939 fielded always 360-400 battalions, which fell to 110-115 during the Cold War, as the US
1/14
backed its European allies with the its massive air force. Today Italy fields 41 battalions (infantry, tanks, recon, special forces, rangers).
Likewise the British Army fielded for most of its history (especially after the 1908 Haldane reforms) 450-480 battalions, which came 2/n
in three types: 150-160 regular battalions (of which a third was always in India), around 100 reserve battalions to provide replacements for the regular battalions, and 200-220 territorial battalions, which (at least on paper) could not be deployed overseas. The British Army
3/n