Rubbish they did not defeat Hezbollah they are still there. And yes a Hezbollah drone flew into an army mess hall and raised hell. There is little to be leaned from the Iran /Iraq war. The USSR was able to take Afghanistan and hold much more of it then the USA was, and that is with the USA arming the opposition. Russia is causing between 8 and 10:1 casualties in Ukraine. If Russia was that primitive Ukraine would be kicking ass as its NATO trained and equipped army with full access to Western intel would make a big difference. It does not.
Fascinating interview with Russian commander on the new realities of warfare
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
So you still claim Ukraine is doing just fine in the war and victory is around the corner? Same type of victory as the USA in Afghanistan? Are ships sailing freely through the the red sea?You're hilarious! I'm going to call your nonsense Notti facts in a Notti world.
I can't claim this because Putin's puppet is in the White House.So you still claim Ukraine is doing just fine in the war and victory is around the corner? Same type of victory as the USA in Afghanistan? Are ships sailing freely through the the red sea?
The survival of a few is not victory, Hezbollah was defeated, it leadership obliterated, Syria lost. the Golan heights barrier is now augmented with Mount Hermon, the Syiran Druze are now alliesRubbish they did not defeat Hezbollah they are still there. And yes a Hezbollah drone flew into an army mess hall and raised hell. There is little to be leaned from the Iran /Iraq war. The USSR was able to take Afghanistan and hold much more of it then the USA was, and that is with the USA arming the opposition. Russia is causing between 8 and 10:1 casualties in Ukraine. If Russia was that primitive Ukraine would be kicking ass as its NATO trained and equipped army with full access to Western intel would make a big difference. It does not.
A few dozens, even a few hundred of dead soldiers is not defeat; it is expected in war
In any case the article is about conventional war, not some guerrilla resistance.
Today there is little to leaned from the Iran /Iraq war... Yes, but some Iraqui general in 1990 might had taken conclusions, like the Russian guy that wrote that article. The Iraquis drew conclusions from a war fought between 3rd world countries and try to apply them against the USA.. It didn't end well
The USSR took Afghanistan quickly, but that is my point, these were not "2 opposing sides closely matched "; on one side there was a super power, vastly more powerful that successor state Russia, on the other side a backward tribal confederation.
Russia started the war poorly led, trained, equipped, a 3rd world army, otherwise it would not had lost almost a million casualties
Ukraine is primitive too: a few patriot missile batteries, old NATO tanks, old NATO planes, javelin missiles and whatever leftover the Europeans can throw doesn't make it a NATO army.
Neither side has been capable of achieving air superiority. Both sides lacks the precision missiles needed to take down the enemy's air defense systems, so stalemate
against NATO that won't be the case. Against NATO, the entire Russian air force gets obliterated in the first day of the war. The only card Russia has in that scenario is nuclear threat
They we not defeated. Israel agreed to a ceasefire with them, (which is has violated repeatedly) even after several Hezbollah and Hamas leaders were taken out neither collapsed, both were still fighting. Israel did not take Gaza. Israel has refused to leave Lebanon in violation of the agreement. At the same time Northern Israel still remains evacuated. So no victory for Israel on either front. I would say the biggest win for Israel is the defeat of Assad, but now they have a caliphate next door and you can fully expect in the future it will be fucking with them Russia had not had 1m casualties, that is nonsense. If they did they would have had to conduct more mobilizations. So far they are relying on people enlisting. But you are right about them not starting well. They have about 300K casualties and about 100K kia. Maybe add the Donbass militias and Wagner and you up that by about 60K more casulaties 20K more dead. But ultimately we will never know the real number. There would be much greater visible strains in Russian society if the losses were 1m.The survival of a few is not victory, Hezbollah was defeated, it leadership obliterated, Syria lost. the Golan heights barrier is now augmented with Mount Hermon, the Syiran Druze are now allies
A few dozens, even a few hundred of dead soldiers is not defeat; it is expected in war
In any case the article is about conventional war, not some guerrilla resistance.
Today there is little to leaned from the Iran /Iraq war... Yes, but some Iraqui general in 1990 might had taken conclusions, like the Russian guy that wrote that article. The Iraquis drew conclusions from a war fought between 3rd world countries and try to apply them against the USA.. It didn't end well
The USSR took Afghanistan quickly, but that is my point, these were not "2 opposing sides closely matched "; on one side there was a super power, vastly more powerful that successor state Russia, on the other side a backward tribal confederation.
Russia started the war poorly led, trained, equipped, a 3rd world army, otherwise it would not had lost almost a million casualties
Ukraine is primitive too: a few patriot missile batteries, old NATO tanks, old NATO planes, javelin missiles and whatever leftover the Europeans can throw doesn't make it a NATO army.
Neither side has been capable of achieving air superiority. Both sides lacks the precision missiles needed to take down the enemy's air defense systems, so stalemate
against NATO that won't be the case. Against NATO, the entire Russian air force gets obliterated in the first day of the war. The only card Russia has in that scenario is nuclear threat
Russia has air superiority and they have many different PGMs. More PGMs have been used by Russia in this war then by any other nation in the history of war. Russia has been able to launch large strikes at will, with no aircraft losses for months now due to their use of cruise mililes, drones, glide bombs etc etc,
Last edited:
The lesson should be that you can't hold on to occupied land forever.The survival of a few is not victory, Hezbollah was defeated, it leadership obliterated, Syria lost. the Golan heights barrier is now augmented with Mount Hermon, the Syiran Druze are now allies
A few dozens, even a few hundred of dead soldiers is not defeat; it is expected in war
In any case the article is about conventional war, not some guerrilla resistance.
Today there is little to leaned from the Iran /Iraq war... Yes, but some Iraqui general in 1990 might had taken conclusions, like the Russian guy that wrote that article. The Iraquis drew conclusions from a war fought between 3rd world countries and try to apply them against the USA.. It didn't end well
The USSR took Afghanistan quickly, but that is my point, these were not "2 opposing sides closely matched "; on one side there was a super power, vastly more powerful that successor state Russia, on the other side a backward tribal confederation.
Russia started the war poorly led, trained, equipped, a 3rd world army, otherwise it would not had lost almost a million casualties
Ukraine is primitive too: a few patriot missile batteries, old NATO tanks, old NATO planes, javelin missiles and whatever leftover the Europeans can throw doesn't make it a NATO army.
Neither side has been capable of achieving air superiority. Both sides lacks the precision missiles needed to take down the enemy's air defense systems, so stalemate
against NATO that won't be the case. Against NATO, the entire Russian air force gets obliterated in the first day of the war. The only card Russia has in that scenario is nuclear threat
Russia and the US couldn't keep Afghanistan, the US left Iraq.
Israel left Lebanon twice and still can't hold Palestine without destroying themselves.
Russia can barely hold Ukraine.
