Did Russia completely forget how to use tanks?

Did Russia completely forget how to use tanks?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No, they just only know how to use them in a 1945 war rather than a 2022 one.

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Did you remember to gargle a dozen feminine wieners today?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I'm not Russian, so no.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      What has you b***hes so testy lately?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        They losin'.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Not gonna lie, a twink harem sounds pretty nice.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      maybe you could show me how vanya

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Can vatnigs seriously not go two seconds without sperging about gay sex?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      But vatnig, the only people that love traps are the evilmaxx anon psyop discord trannies such as yourself!

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They're using them the same way that they always have. They didnt forget anything, the world changed and Russia didn't.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Didn't they just come up with the BTG shit in the last couple of decades?

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Jury is still out on it. Peer level armored combat post-WW2 isn't something there is a lot to compare against. Closest would probably be some of the Israeli conflicts (Yom Kippur). Russia's tank losses thus far actually compare pretty favorable against that war. If that holds up, that is actually pretty impressive given the advances in man-portable antitank weapons.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Its impressively embarrassing.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Closest would probably be some of the Israeli conflicts (Yom Kippur). Russia's tank losses thus far actually compare pretty favorable against that war.
      What are you smoking

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Don't you remember when Israel lost 100% of the armour that they deployed- either through destruction or abandoned equipment?
        Me neither.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Don't you remember when Israel lost 100% of the armour that they deployed- either through destruction or abandoned equipment?
        Me neither.

        Israel lost as between 1000 and 1700 tanks in three weeks. Depending on who's counts you believe, Russia didn't suffer those sorts of losses for the first 6-8 months.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Israel lost as between 1000 and 1700 tanks in three weeks
          What the frick are you smoking
          >Depending on who's counts you believe, Russia didn't suffer those sorts of losses for the first 6-8 months.
          Pass me dat shit NOW

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Israel lost as between 1000 and 1700 tanks in three weeks.
          israelis had 400 destroyed, 600 damaged
          out of a about 1700 tanks in active duty

          but they were also facing off against an enemy comparable to, if not much larger, themselves
          and who were armed with the then modern T-62 and the venerable T-55
          while the israelis were only armed with a mixture of cents, M48A3s, and M60s, and a few M4 shermans

          so israelis taking high losses when outnumbered and equally gunned is about what you expect
          but russians held about 3500 tanks in active service against less than a thousand ukranian tanks, and they have better tanks as well with Ukrainian T-64BVs barely a match for russian T-72B3s

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Israel only deployed 1700 tanks...and fought 2 nations directly and against 10 additional nations expeditionary forces.

          They only lost 400 tanks outright, another 600 damaged or captured.

          War only lasted 3 weeks and they slaughtered about 18,000 and killed like 2500 tanks.

          And this was in 1973 with Israels tanks being Centurians, some m48 and m60 Pattons, and even shermans.

          While the enemy had a LOT of t-55s and t-63s.

          Not exactly the most modern tank divisions of even that era.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Did Russia completely forget how to use tanks?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/3KdHyat.jpg

      Did Russia completely forget how to use tanks?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Tanks but no tanks anon.

        >+2000
        Glad to see the mobiks are doing their best as cannon fodder.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        does not matter, meanwhile russia is down to a dozen of rusty outdated tanks

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/SXpcSQp.png

      [...]

      anyone who unironically believes these numbers is a fricking moron

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Seems real enough to me, I see new videos every day with fields of dead Russians and blown up vehicles. Your boys are getting buttfricked out there lmao

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          That's because you're being spoonfed Ukrainian propaganda and you eat it up without question.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Post battle lines showing vatnik successes.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Why? Because they're higher than what you'd like them to be?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The vatnik is still scream in pain as it lies I see. Yes those numbers have been 100% right since the war began. Suck it up. Your lies don't matter anymore vatnik your life is utterly pointless.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Photos, geolocation and lack of Russian success....

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >don't believe your lying eyes

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        you're right, its probably more

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The US estimates a little over 100k casualties, this is moronic

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Why did you add "a little over"? The quote is "more than 100 000". Can vatniks do anything without bending the truth?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Its the same thing
          t. anyone with critical thinking skills

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            No, it might as well mean "we have only been able to confirm 100 000 so at least that". The point is moot anyway, a quote is a quote, you can't change the wording to what you *think* they mean. You're a repulsive vatnik liar shrieking because you always get called out on your bullshit.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Im actually not Russian, youre just moronic

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                good morning sir, vatnik isn't a nationality

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don't care where you are from you you seem a a deliberate liar. Those figures have been spot on since the war began. Are you new here? Why are you liking and trying to create doubt about what has proven a vali9d source for 9 months?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I didnt disagree with any numbers. I simply stated that "more than 100k" and " a little over 100k" could reasonably be interpreted to mean the same thing

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The moronic one is you you fell for the planted Russian line of doubt both sides equally. This from a nation, Russia that lied about invading Ukraine right up to the day it did via its ambassadors in every nation. The Ukrainian esti9mates of Russian losses have been very accurate and we can tell they are because the rollout of scrap tanks and mobilisation fits perfectly with them.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The Ukrainian esti9mates of Russian losses have been very accurate and we can tell they are because the rollout of scrap tanks and mobilisation fits perfectly with them.
                when did I disagree with any numbers you stupid frick.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >No, it might as well mean "we have only been able to confirm 100 000 so at least that".
              so a little over 100k, got it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If it makes you feel better then go ahead and think that. As a vatnik you're used to disappointment.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Do you understand the difference between an unconfirmed kill and a confirmed kill and why it is so much more difficult to ID dead bodies in an active warzone? Russia itself doesn't know how many casualties they have. Is this really what vatniks have been reduced to? Coping over semantics which in the best case scenario means they have a casualty figure of a 100 000+?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Russia itself doesn't know how many casualties they have.
                They do, they have the Ukrainian numbers for Russian dead, who are pretty meticulous in logging and processing both found and observed Russian dead.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >they have the Ukrainian numbers for Russian dead, who are pretty meticulous in logging and processing both found and observed Russian dead.
                https://streamable.com/jdqhtt

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It is because they lie about their own figures, they can't understand the concept of trust and transparency.
                >if we do it everyone else is probably doing it too

                What is the point in your lies and fud? Why do you even bother? Its no like anyone who has spent more than 30 seconds looking at this war is even slightly effected by your Russian bullshit fountain.

                You must have quoted the wrong post.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Sorry if I did. Its so fricking tedious the Russian bullshit is always the same tried formula, 'doubt the numbers because if they were Russian you would'. They stopped being a matter of doubt when like a microwave going ping they predicted the mobilisation. The Ukrainian estimates of Russian losses are remarkably exact it seems. I see that as due to the incredible use of small drones with video as artillery spotters, that information feeds right into military intelligence and enemy casualty calculations and enemy equipment destroyed identification. The implication of that though is not that the Ukrainian estimates are too high, rather that they are too low.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What is the point in your lies and fud? Why do you even bother? Its no like anyone who has spent more than 30 seconds looking at this war is even slightly effected by your Russian bullshit fountain.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Coping over semantics
                are you kidding me? Anon got called out for saying "a little over 100k" instead of what, "more than 100k". Its an argument over semantics that started this argument

                [...]
                [...]
                Now you are agonising about speaking English projecting at me. You are a liar and trying to 'muddy the waters'. The minusrus estimates for tanks, armoured, vehicles and artillery are very accurate, they should be, most of them vehicles destroyed have drone video footage spotters watching. The Russian infantry looses are if anything far to low as they do not publish real numbers for Russian POWSs or include for example Russian desertions or fratricide. You are a liar though. Minusrus aligned perfectly with the rollout of broken t62 scrap tanks and thye mobilisation. The figures are right have been demonstrably correct for 9 months(orxy would confirm them with a lag as would be expected in Spring) and you are either a liar or a clown.

                If it makes you feel better then go ahead and think that. As a vatnik you're used to disappointment.

                listen, morons, I am not russian or sympathetic to russians. anon said "a little over 100k" and got called out for it instead of saying "more than 100k". you stupid fricking morons.

                Show me where I lied. and claims of "muddying the waters" is a non-argument so frick off

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                He (You) was called out for misquoting people in favor of a more favorable interpretation. Him trying to downplay puccia getting btfo is the cope.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                if Russia lost 100k than Ukraine lost 500k troops. unless you think Ukrainian media has more proof than ukrainians getting interviewed. Zelensky says in May 21st he has 700k troops and Russia brought in 318k reserves over their existing number than statistics are not favorable for Ukraine. Especially when the west is now making excuses to not supply ukraine and saying shit like a day in ukraine is like a month in Afghanistan based on the amount of ammunition Ukraine uses. See

                uktaine media wants to make themselves rambos but reality on the battlefield is different.

                https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/07/ukraine-kherson-offensive-casualties-ammunition/

                “We lost five people for every one they did,” said Ihor, a 30-year-old platoon commander who injured his back when the tank he was riding in crashed into a ditch.
                Ihor had no military experience before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. He made a living selling animal feed to pig and cow farms. His replacement as platoon commander also has no previous military experience, he said.

                Oleksandr said the Russian artillery fire was relentless. “They were just hitting us all the time,” he said. “If we fire three mortars, they fire 20 in return.”
                The Ukrainian soldiers said they had to carefully ration their use of munitions but even when they did fire, they had trouble hitting targets. “When you give the coordinates, it’s supposed to be accurate, but it’s not,” he said, noting that his equipment dated back to 1989.

                this channel here offers war footage from Russia https://www.bitchute.com/channel/nnwlaOOuDM1W/ most pro-ukraine users are not even going to look at this channel anyways. But I also found this video.

                pause at 0:40 there were 30 of them as tankers and only 7 remained. this video was on november 18

                .

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >if Russia lost 100k than Ukraine lost 500k troops
                Why stop at 500k? I mean if you're making up dream scenarios why not just claim that Russia is winning like you guys usually do?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                uktaine media wants to make themselves rambos but reality on the battlefield is different.

                https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/07/ukraine-kherson-offensive-casualties-ammunition/

                “We lost five people for every one they did,” said Ihor, a 30-year-old platoon commander who injured his back when the tank he was riding in crashed into a ditch.
                Ihor had no military experience before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. He made a living selling animal feed to pig and cow farms. His replacement as platoon commander also has no previous military experience, he said.

                Oleksandr said the Russian artillery fire was relentless. “They were just hitting us all the time,” he said. “If we fire three mortars, they fire 20 in return.”
                The Ukrainian soldiers said they had to carefully ration their use of munitions but even when they did fire, they had trouble hitting targets. “When you give the coordinates, it’s supposed to be accurate, but it’s not,” he said, noting that his equipment dated back to 1989.

                this channel here offers war footage from Russia https://www.bitchute.com/channel/nnwlaOOuDM1W/ most pro-ukraine users are not even going to look at this channel anyways. But I also found this video.

                pause at 0:40 there were 30 of them as tankers and only 7 remained. this video was on november 18

                >muh Ukraine
                Is russia lost 50-80k, then the Ukrainians might have lost 40k. If russia have 100k losses, then Ukraine may fewer than that or maybe close to that. At the beginning, the russians/Ukrainians have a 1:1 ratio of losses. Now that russia is beginning to lose their modernized equipment and also losing artillery, their loss ratio is now 3:1 with russians dying more in doves than the Ukrainians are.
                >b-but this video and other sources show...
                If its even accurate, then the russians are suffering even worse losses and wounded. Don't make me mention the russian state of medevacs and overall medical care and logistical supplies. As this war goes on, the russians are losing more men than the Ukrainians are due to them taking more than they can chu and also ensuring proper logistical support and medical care for their troops. Even if the Ukrainians get wounded, they can get treated and go back to the battlefield if the injuries does not bar them from combat permanently. The russians, however, cannot ensure whether their wounded survive or not. 10 men get wounded, 6/10 will die due to lack of medical care. The more you claim how the Ukrainians have it worse, the more you will also imply that the russians having it bad. Ukrainians are not the invaders, the russians are. The moment your invasion force goes on the defensive is the moment you know shit is fricked.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >At the beginning, the russians/Ukrainians have a 1:1 ratio of losses

                I suspect the Russians felt those losses way more than Ukraine did, Putin threw the best he had at Ukraine and they were slaughtered. Russia won't be able to make up for those losses with troops of the same or even similar quality for years, not at the rate they're throwing bodies into the woodchipper.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Of course, an invading force would feel those losses more than the defenders. The Ukrainians at least minimized their losses after regrouping and coming up with better plans. The russians didn't and as a result, their infantry got slaughtered, tanks abandoned and what not. Their artillery, while many, were inaccurate and they ran out of ammo as soon as the Ukrainians started to blow up their ammo depot. It doesn't help that the maintenance for the weapons are low, as a result, inaccurate firings and artilleries start to break down.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Now boys and girls study this carefully and tell me how we know this is a closeted vatnik post

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >if Russia lost 100k than Ukraine lost 500k troops
                So you took quote one guy talking about one specific situation and extrapolate that to be true for the entire conflict? Those are some needful mental gymnastics, sir.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/SXpcSQp.png

      [...]

      The real number is probably somewhere between theses and the Oryx, visually confirmed losses (for tanks at least). This probaly means 2000-2500 tank losses which is a startling figure and a huge proportion of the ready Russian tank fleet.

      Those Casualty figures seem too high to me given the US puts it at 100k+ casualties, 40k of which being wounded. This probably means were seeing 50-60 thousand Russians KIA and 150k wounded. at a 1:3 ratio. This is GWOT+ Vietnam levels of casualties and is a number that no Western nation could tolerate

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >40k of which being wounded
        Correction: 40k killed

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >The real number is probably somewhere between theses and the Oryx, visually confirmed losses (for tanks at least). This probaly means 2000-2500 tank losses which is a startling figure and a huge proportion of the ready Russian tank fleet.
        You're a liar. No one could be that stupid at this stage to be using the only Russia pour doubt tactic after 9 months of watching these figures rise and match reality every time. You'd either have to be a certifiable idiot beyond the competency to use this site or a liar so you are a liar

        >40k of which being wounded
        Correction: 40k killed

        The russian lies lies lies even about their own dead they lie lie lie

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >The russian lies lies lies even about their own dead they lie lie lie
          That is why there are no Russian sources used. The 100k number comes from the Americans (US). I believe it is likely a conservative estimate and only what they KNOW as loses with 95%+ certainty is counted. The Ukranian figures which is where the linked infographics come from are very likely over estimated as is always done. Initial battle damage assessment is almost always overcounted unless you have total situational dominance like in the GWOT. If you are treating the Ukranian numbers with a healthy dose of skepticism you're being realistic, not a moronic Vatnik and if you aren't then you are a fricking smoothbrain.

          The Oryx figures are visually confirmed losses, for each one of those is a photo or video of a knocked out Russian tank. Thanks to the fact that not every tank kill can be photographed in a a warzone, this is definetly a low number. Given the higher Ukranian figure, I put a number somewhere in between as to where I expect the actual number to be.

          >Oryx loss numbers for reference: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

          [...]

          Liar liar vatnik on fire

          Ok, you're clearly don't understand the English language, you're just moronic

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >The Ukranian figures which is where the linked infographics come from are very likely over estimated as is always done.
            Is it? According to who?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              according to historical trends.
              How many targets did the A-10 take out in desert storm? you'd get 2 differnt answers if you asked the A-10 pilots getting off strike missions and the pencil pushers who did a full analysis in the aftermath of the conflict. The pilots answer will be the larger number but they pencil pushers will be closer to the truth

              This happens almost every time. Claimed kills > actual kills

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The trend in this war has shown the Ukrainian estimates to being very close to the truth, but you would rather cope about A-10 pilots in a war that ended before you were even born.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I didnt disagree with any numbers. I simply stated that "more than 100k" and " a little over 100k" could reasonably be interpreted to mean the same thing

            >The Ukrainian esti9mates of Russian losses have been very accurate and we can tell they are because the rollout of scrap tanks and mobilisation fits perfectly with them.
            when did I disagree with any numbers you stupid frick.

            Now you are agonising about speaking English projecting at me. You are a liar and trying to 'muddy the waters'. The minusrus estimates for tanks, armoured, vehicles and artillery are very accurate, they should be, most of them vehicles destroyed have drone video footage spotters watching. The Russian infantry looses are if anything far to low as they do not publish real numbers for Russian POWSs or include for example Russian desertions or fratricide. You are a liar though. Minusrus aligned perfectly with the rollout of broken t62 scrap tanks and thye mobilisation. The figures are right have been demonstrably correct for 9 months(orxy would confirm them with a lag as would be expected in Spring) and you are either a liar or a clown.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Now you are agonising about speaking English projecting at me. You are a liar and trying to 'muddy the waters'
              Have you considered that we are different people?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The US estimates a little over 100k casualties, this is moronic

        Liar liar vatnik on fire

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >This probably means were seeing 50-60 thousand Russians KIA and 150k wounded. at a 1:3 ratio.
        They would be lucky to have that ratio I think.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I'd rather be pleasantly suprised and I want to give a somewhat balanced view. The total casualties is probably over the 200k mark but I wanted to be cautious on dead v. wounded

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Have Russians not invented brooms? When they loot Ukrainian homes and see brooms do they think there bust be a family of giants who live there and that is their toothbrush?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            bro theres standing water in that room, a broom aint gonna do shit

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            bold of you to assume russians have toothbrushes

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    vatniks use WW2 tactics

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Infantry and tanks in one picture
      That would actually be an improvement.

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They forgot to have the factories building 300 per month so they can lose them at the same rate.

    And the rest of the world providing them with trucks and everything else so they could focus on tanks.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Russia's still trying to fight attritional warfare despite no longer having any of the industry needed to actually support it.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    can one really say they forgot how to do maintainence when they clearly never bothered with it in the first place.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Did America lose 40% of its tank fleet this year? No? I guess that's why nobody asks if they forgot how to use them

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    probably, given how many tanks and tankers they lost by now

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I was watching an interview yesterday with a puccian dodge-drafter that said he was going to get mobilized because of his MOS as a BMP driver, even though he had never even sat in one.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >dodge-drafter
        God damn it I knew I should have proof read my shit.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    We got all this money by living in your head rent-free, thirdie.

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >carefully curating every single damaged abrams of the last 50 years into a cope album
    >still not even 5% of T72 losses available in a single search
    Sirs...

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why does the "prisoner of war" figure never go above 1000?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      dead bodies arent POWs

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why are Russians and their fanboys such liars? They have been at this 'doubt everybody as much as Moscow' all year.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I think one of the reasons for Russian shitposting is just to slide uncomfortable information so here it is again....

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Given the images of destroyed Abrams to destroyed T-series I'd say the each Abrams is worth AT LEAST several dozen Russian Tanks

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    When you consider that every damn thing has a camera in it now, its not really surprising the Ukrainian estimates are so precise. They probably know more about the actual state of the Russian military than Putin

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Funny how even pro-puccian posters have more trust in American sources than they do in their own.

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The problem is they still think they're the Soviet Union.
    >what if we drive tanks straight into capital?
    >da igor, this strategy worked well in Hungary, Poland and Lithuania. Ukrop will return to the fold in manner

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    After WW2 its like they completely forgot all the lessons they learnt about doctrine, logistics, etc.

    Or maybe it was the corruption after the fall of the soviet union?

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    uktaine media wants to make themselves rambos but reality on the battlefield is different.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/09/07/ukraine-kherson-offensive-casualties-ammunition/

    “We lost five people for every one they did,” said Ihor, a 30-year-old platoon commander who injured his back when the tank he was riding in crashed into a ditch.
    Ihor had no military experience before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24. He made a living selling animal feed to pig and cow farms. His replacement as platoon commander also has no previous military experience, he said.

    Oleksandr said the Russian artillery fire was relentless. “They were just hitting us all the time,” he said. “If we fire three mortars, they fire 20 in return.”
    The Ukrainian soldiers said they had to carefully ration their use of munitions but even when they did fire, they had trouble hitting targets. “When you give the coordinates, it’s supposed to be accurate, but it’s not,” he said, noting that his equipment dated back to 1989.

    this channel here offers war footage from Russia https://www.bitchute.com/channel/nnwlaOOuDM1W/ most pro-ukraine users are not even going to look at this channel anyways. But I also found this video.

    pause at 0:40 there were 30 of them as tankers and only 7 remained. this video was on november 18

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      if Russia lost 100k than Ukraine lost 500k troops. unless you think Ukrainian media has more proof than ukrainians getting interviewed. Zelensky says in May 21st he has 700k troops and Russia brought in 318k reserves over their existing number than statistics are not favorable for Ukraine. Especially when the west is now making excuses to not supply ukraine and saying shit like a day in ukraine is like a month in Afghanistan based on the amount of ammunition Ukraine uses. See [...]
      .

      >Russia loses a massive amount of territory to the shanty town army of Ukraine

      You do realize making Ukraine look weak only makes Russia look worse right sirs?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      .... but they still took Kherson?

      >losing to an enemy that supposedly doesn't have the same numbers, equipment and ammunition as you as a defender
      how did it all go so wrong?!

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      If you look at the date of that article you will realize that that is shortly before the kharkiv counteroffensive, meaning that most of ukraines resources were likely not posted around kherson but up north.

      Some parts of the ukranian army haveor are being trained by western advisers, and they will presumably help to train any replacements when they get rotated out, also certain regiments will have a lot of first hand combat experience. So the ukranian army does get more experienced over time, even though it is still a conscript army and so suffers from the same training problem of all conscript armies.

      On the other hand russia also has a conscript army, so the sides are even, but russia keeps losing men faster, so they conscripts from russia are even more poorly trained and supplied. So the ukranians are not rambo, but they are still better than the russian troops, and over time the artillery gap is closing. The ukies are getting more and better artillery and the russians are losing theirs. This is not to mention that the russians are down to their last month or two of good shells. After another month or so they will HAVE to either get shells from the norks or use old soviet shells which are at least 30 years old, so most of them will be duds.

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They never knew. They just spam shit until their opponent is exhausted.

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Yes

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I think that Russia just stopped training anyone, and thought that somehow the knowledge would be passed down by osmosis or RNA or racial memory or something.
    It's the downside of living in a kleptocracy, everyone helps cover up your crimes, so you never actually know what you actually have at any one time.
    If Putin had just had the balls to take what he wanted and make it official, instead of acting like a criminal, he'd have had real numbers at the start of this war and maybe realised he was leading Jack and shit, and Jack defected to the West.

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They never changed… everyone else spent a couple decades figuring out how to beat WW2 russian tank tactics.. they’re having their modern day Little Bighorn/ Custer moment.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Hah, just like the Gracie brothers.

  27. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    When did Russians know how to use tanks? Not in Afghanistan, not in Chechnya.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      back when Tukhachevsky was still alive I guess

  28. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Russia has literally never had a good tank force. Their tactics in ALL manners of combat have always boiled down to throwing bodies at the problem until the problem goes away. And for some wars that's been enough to get them through some situations. But here in Ukraine in the 21st century, those 19th century tier tactics no longer cut it. This isn't the Cold War anymore when NATO had to worry about thousands of T-72's storming through West Germany. NATO always had the tech advantage, but now that tech advantage has absolutely taken away any advantage that mass wave based attacks had. Smart munitions, precision artillery that can perform convergence fire and move minutes after firing, incredibly high powered and accurate anti-tank guided missiles & anti-air missiles, thermals so small you can fit them onto every soldiers weapon, you get the picture. It should be pretty obvious to anyone that in the opening days of the war that Ukraine was going to lose a lot of ground. That's how first-strikes work; the enemy has many more attack corridors than you can possibly defend. And now that that original attack stalled months ago, the Ukrainians counterattack has been nearly unstoppable due to their massive tech advantage.

    All in all it's an absolutely pathetic display from Russia, a nation we all once thought to be the second most powerful nation in the world. That title now likely goes to China. Ukraine is probably going to make top 5 most powerful nations in the world after the end of this war which is frightening in a sense as I don't think there's been any other example in history when a nation has literally gone from top 50 to top 5 in terms of power in under a fricking YEAR.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      ukraine is turbopoor but you gotta remember that it was ukraine who designed and built the soviet navy, air force, mechanized forces, and space program

  29. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Soviet designs have always been kinda crappy, relying on quantity over quality. The problem is that Russia no longer has the resources for quantity anymore.

  30. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    you tell me how to use tanks.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *