There are two ways to tell a truth, words and actions. Actions always speak louder because it is harder for actions to lie. Recently, Russia has been telegraphing that she has lost the war. Not set backs, but lost with no hope of winning.
These are just 3 of the many recent attacks that can only be described as scorched earth actions. Its something an army does when it is retreating with no hope of coming back. It is the ultimate expression of if I can't have t neither can you. Sometimes it is even a valid tactic.
For example, the Soviets did much the same in 1941 when retreating from the German invasion. The goal was to make long German supply lines even longer by denying local resources. Terrible and deadly to the civilians left behind but a logical case of strategic triage. In this case
however, Russia's actions more closely resemble Germany's after the tide of the war had turned. Germany revisited the scorched earth tactics the Soviets had used and turned the tables. It was an admission of defeat, that the war had become unwinnable. That is what we are seeing
now. You don't destroy billions of dollars worth of critical infrastructure if you think you are going to be the ones left in control of the area. You do it too leave your enemy holding the bag. It also adds to Europe's energy crisis. Russia has been de-industrializing Ukraine
almost from the first day of the war and this left Ukraine with a net surplus of energy she could export to Europe. That surplus is shrinking as Russia tries to bomb Ukraine into a pre-industrial state. Its not all doom and gloom though. Because Russia is losing, it means the
rebuilding has a real hope of giving Ukraine a much needed chance to build more modern infrastructure, factories and other economic bones to create a society that is competitive. New factories matter a lot in the battle for efficiency. Post war look at the economic miracles of
Germany, Japan, South Korea. Or the Post Mao economic powerhouse that China has become. Or flip side look at the decline of American and British industrial might as our factories aged and became inefficient post war. The best response to Russia's scorched earth tactics are firm
commitments by the major powers to provide low cost loans, favorable trade deals and access to technology post war. It will also give the Ukrainian government a leg up in fighting corruption as the old economic institutions are replaced with modern globally integrated ones
The Ukrainian government and our leaders like @JohnBoozman, @SenTomCotton, and @RepFrenchHill are going to have to vote to approve much of this so that central banks and investors feel secure enough to invest in Ukraine. I think they will and 10 years post war I think we will see
Ukraine that is following in the foot steps of the other countries that emerged from war's shadow into a much brighter economic future. Until then however the war is not over. Russian troops remain in the South and in the Donbass. Russia is making moves near Kherson and I saw a
picture of a bailey bridge section headed towards Kherson. Baily bridges are a type of semi-portable truss bridge made from pre-fabbed sections and can move a lot more traffic than a pontoon bridge. They can be put up quickly and don't have as many limitations on traffic. However
they are not HIMARS proof. I don't know if Russia is thinking they can build one to get troops out or supplies in but Ukraine gets a vote. That pocket of combat power is in deep doo doo and I can't wait for its defeat. I would love to see Ukrainian troops driving up the Black Sea
coast by the end of the current campaign season. Every time I log into @MriyaReport I hope to hear about a surrender. Until Russia is defeat, I will continue to give to @MriyaAid and to support the @georgian_legion and remain committed to seeing Ukraine win on Ukraine's terms:
@DrBrainMD, so a quick thread in answer to your rhetorical question. So the best rounds the Russian's had for the best tanks they had using the 2A46-M5 125mm gun were the 3BM42, 3BM59 and 3BM60. Older tanks have to use older ammunition like the 3BM42 and 3BM42M. Even these modern
Russian rounds suffer from the inherent limitations of the ammo system of the T-series tanks. A quick wiki look claims 900mm RHAe for the best of them. This is unlikely to be enough to penetrate the front of an M1A1/2SEP that has DU armor. The front of the Abrams is often
estimated to be around 1600mm RHAe. The reverse is not true. So even if Russia has not shot off its best APDS rounds they are unlikely to be effective. The reverse however is most decidedly not true. During the First Gulf War the M829A1 silver bullet wrecked T-72's in almost
Part 2. So in closing, Russia has inferior officers who cannot conduct a successful battle and her "wins" have come with unsustainable losses. Her troops and equipment quality is nose diving and her armies have been routed at least twice and a huge cauldron now exists near
Kherson that has the bulk of her remaining combat power outside of the Donbass. That is not a recipe for eventually victory. Infact that the only way Russia can win would be for Western support to dry up. I do not see that happening. #POTUS is fully committed to supporting
Ukraine as are my political leaders @JohnBoozman, @SenTomCotton, and @RepFrenchHill. Most NATO leaders and many other leaders in the Free World likewise are solid supporters. Holdouts like Scholz who only want to do enough to not get kicked from the Christmas Party invite list
First off, I am attacking his arguments. His past may gain or deny access to an audience but it is not the argument so I will not use fallacies The articles first error is its mischaracterization of Kleotograd's goals regarding Kyiv. This part of the war
was not designed to pin down UAF units to grease the way for a Russian victory in the Donbass and elsewhere. That is not what happened, but it sets the tone for the entire article. As far as I can tell his article raises the following points 1. Kyiv wasn't a defeat. 2. Russian
Will Kherson surrender (today) or not? Its still trapped regardless and this has taken another 1/3rd of the Russian combat power in Ukraine off the table. That leaves the troops in the Donbass. They have the best logistics, terrain and most of the remaining combat power left to
the Russian Army. What they still don't have is competent leadership, good training, espirit de corps or unification of will and purpose. Would you want to be a Russian soldier there? Pressure from the North, the ZSU is still fighting hard around Bakhmut and now word that the
ground combat power in Kherson is about to go belly up and start smelling like a bad fish. Tick tock, tick tock M'fer the time is coming. Its really hard for authoritarian regimes to survive this kind of repeated shock to the system. Will the fall of Kherson and another major
I will start off today with a shout out to @LanguageIearner his updates are essential reading given the fast moving pace of the war recently. In particular I want to zero in on the claim that Russia has begun issuing D-1 (M1943) 152mm howitzers to LNR/DPR forces. This is an old
gun that is itself a modified version of a gun designed before Hitler invaded Poland. While in and of itself not that noteworthy, after all Ukraine has also been handed US made WWII era M101 howitzers it is noteworthy because Russia had so many other more modern guns. We have
already seen the Russians issue D-20 guns made in the 1950's and 60's and now those are apparently used up and Russia is pulling out kit used to shell Berlin. Since Russian and separatist troop numbers are not expanding the only reason is massive attrition. Some combination of
So information has been coming at us firehose style and it can be difficult to build a comprehensive picture. We know things look good but how good is it really? There are a few video posts and a Russian messaging campaign that viewed together and in context say a lot. I will
walk you through what I see. First, Russia is claiming that her "pullback" from Kharkiv was done to further her own war aims. I mean survival can be a war aim, but what does the evidence say. Adding to this Denis Pushilin is claiming his troops have it under control. Really?