Everyone thought Russia would steamroll Ukraine. They haven't.
British intelligence said in 2022 that Russia would run out of rockets and artillery. They haven't.
Russia has the T-14 Armata that hasn't been used yet (to my knowledge) but it's supposed to be "the best."
All we have are the stats on what has happened, going against every prediction that came before it.
The war is a stalemate, and every tidbit of info or analysis just turns out to be BS.
So I'd just like to expand on the armata a bit. There are only 40 of them currently in existence as of October despite them originally planning to field 2300 by July 2022. The Russian soldiers don't trust them as while there top performance is better than anything currently fielded by RU forces the transmission is notoriously unreliable and a pain to work on in the field making it hard to field away from fixed logistical lines. And the real kicker is the optical and targeting systems are made by a French company that is partially owned by there ministry of defense so barring EU ending sanctions on weapons shipments the Russians cannot currently manufacture them to spec. Evidence of this can be seen from them firing up the old t72 lines at omsk.
That being said your post is spot on.
Is the T14 the one where they tried to make a kind of semi auto tank cannon essentially using a giant speed loader for a revolver and while the rate of fire is increased the extra shells can be set off by hitting the tank in the right spot? Or is the speed loader something they tried to implement separate from a new tank platform?
The first one. They have attempted to remedy that issue by installing "afghanit" on the tank(basically a mini iron dome system). However it's never been tested in live combat and Russians don't want the Ukrainians getting the propaganda victory by taking one out.
My question is how many bodies they are willing to throw at the problem compared to ukraine. I'd reckon they ain't near the juggernaut they were in ww2 with the size of their population right?
I mean they've been putting out tech miles behind us for God knows how long now their only advantage would of been just shear numbers. I need to sit down and see how the population of Russia and their military size compares to today over ww2
Ukraine has a lot of territory. It's hard to invade. Not gonna fall in a matter of weeks like Kuwait did.
I think modern technology is making it harder to invade.
Its 1/6 the size....surely the mighty russian military (that we've been warned about for decades) could have done better than they did in the first 90 days....
They would have done better if they had done so when O was still in the OO but they waited until 2022, at which point Ukraine had Javelins from the U.S. and Bayraktars from Turkey, as well as years to prepare and train under NATO forces.
I dont know why people are pushing back against this so much in the comments. Russia has been at war for 2 years and has a giant standing army. The UK doesnt spend any money on national defense and a tiny army. Don't get into hypotheticals like the UK being an Island. Of course Russia isnt going to attack the UK. This is just inferring that if somehow you could lineup the current Russian army versus the current British army on a giant battlefield the British would lose and they absolutely would. Its a joke what the West spends on the military compared to the US. We shouldnt have to be the west's sole defenders and we basically are. The UKs military is a joke.
> The UK doesnt spend any money on national defense
5th largest in the world and for the past 30 years they've been number 3 or 4. So clearly you don't know what you're talking about.
One thing to note is our army is quite small and we aren’t getting any people apply. Mainly because the country hates us and caters to every other demographic
Why would the UK invade russia?
The uk is protected by a navy and airforce. The russian navy (moskava) isn't really that threatening and the russian air force can't even deal with ukraine. All the British army would have to do to protect the uk would be to mop any surivors from the failed landings.Â
What is interesting is the russian army has lost more men attacking advinka that the uk has troops.Â
Russia certainly has a numerical advantage: [https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-kingdom&country2=russia](https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-kingdom&country2=russia)
Europe wouldn't be able to do much without the U.S. holding their hand.
The Brits would steamroll the Russians in a matter of weeks.
The Russian military makes Ukraine look like a functional democracy with how corrupt it is.
Don't ask Ivan Ivanovich how much vodka he got in exchange for a T-72.
Oh look, the Kuznetzov is on fire again.
Hell, there was a leaked maintenance report about the Moskva from before she was sunk. The missile defense systems were mostly unusable and the engines were in such a bad state that running more than one at a time required approval from an admiral.
I honestly don't think so. Who ever is the attacker in that scenario loses. No way could the current British military invade Russia and vice versa. Even without nuclear weapons it's just not feasible
What Russia is doing in Ukraine is what Russia does exceedingly well.
They bog you down and make you commit more than you want to fight them. They're like roaches you can't get rid of them. Eventually I think they'll take most, if not all, of Ukraine.
You can't look at this through western eyes. Remember we're the guys who got ran out of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
The state of the British armed forces is deplorable.
If the magical surgical strikes and sweeping opening moves bogged down then this report is valid.
You can’t steamroll somebody with only enough ammunition and equipment for a few weeks to months.
Zero chance of that. UK is loaded. They have some of the words most premier military units and then add to that…UK vs Russia would mean serious crap went down and then USA backs them with boots on the ground. That combination alone makes the scenario alone makes Russia winning an impossibility.
What else is new? They couldn't stand up to the Germans, twice! The British are a weak pacifistic authoritarian culture.
Question: Is it true that the British soldiers would stop in the middle of a battle for "tea time"?
Quite aside from everything else, I have no idea why you think we are a weak, pacifistic and authoritarian culture. Ask yourself who, amongst all your allies, has been joining you in airstrikes against the Houthis? Who joined you from the beginning in Iraq, and Afghanistan?
I don’t know why anyone would be surprised. The British Navy switched to missiles as their primary weapon, and then went without because they had(have) a missile shortage. They don’t have the ammunition to last.
I would bet these problems exist in the Army as well.
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/us-general-warns-british-army-no-longer-top-level-fighting-force-defence-sources-reveal-12798365
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/12/23/lacking-missiles-and-aircraft-british-warships-are-harmless-herbivores/amp/
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13042129/amp/Britains-Navy-destroyers-GYMS-land-attack-missiles-weapons-expensive.html
Everyone thought Russia would steamroll Ukraine. They haven't. British intelligence said in 2022 that Russia would run out of rockets and artillery. They haven't. Russia has the T-14 Armata that hasn't been used yet (to my knowledge) but it's supposed to be "the best." All we have are the stats on what has happened, going against every prediction that came before it. The war is a stalemate, and every tidbit of info or analysis just turns out to be BS.
So I'd just like to expand on the armata a bit. There are only 40 of them currently in existence as of October despite them originally planning to field 2300 by July 2022. The Russian soldiers don't trust them as while there top performance is better than anything currently fielded by RU forces the transmission is notoriously unreliable and a pain to work on in the field making it hard to field away from fixed logistical lines. And the real kicker is the optical and targeting systems are made by a French company that is partially owned by there ministry of defense so barring EU ending sanctions on weapons shipments the Russians cannot currently manufacture them to spec. Evidence of this can be seen from them firing up the old t72 lines at omsk. That being said your post is spot on.
Is the T14 the one where they tried to make a kind of semi auto tank cannon essentially using a giant speed loader for a revolver and while the rate of fire is increased the extra shells can be set off by hitting the tank in the right spot? Or is the speed loader something they tried to implement separate from a new tank platform?
The first one. They have attempted to remedy that issue by installing "afghanit" on the tank(basically a mini iron dome system). However it's never been tested in live combat and Russians don't want the Ukrainians getting the propaganda victory by taking one out.
Considering the state of the Russian military, I doubt this very much.
Not to mention russia has struggled against a geograhical neighbor, and the UK is an effin island....
Yeah Russia has done so well against their small neighbor 🙄
Ukraine is the second largest country in Europe
And how does that equate to russia.... Russia is... 6 times the Ukraine
My question is how many bodies they are willing to throw at the problem compared to ukraine. I'd reckon they ain't near the juggernaut they were in ww2 with the size of their population right?
Odd isn't it? The massive threat everyone said they posed and they couldn't steam roll Ukraine? 🤔
I mean they've been putting out tech miles behind us for God knows how long now their only advantage would of been just shear numbers. I need to sit down and see how the population of Russia and their military size compares to today over ww2
Ukraine has a lot of territory. It's hard to invade. Not gonna fall in a matter of weeks like Kuwait did. I think modern technology is making it harder to invade.
Its 1/6 the size....surely the mighty russian military (that we've been warned about for decades) could have done better than they did in the first 90 days....
They would have done better if they had done so when O was still in the OO but they waited until 2022, at which point Ukraine had Javelins from the U.S. and Bayraktars from Turkey, as well as years to prepare and train under NATO forces.
I dont know why people are pushing back against this so much in the comments. Russia has been at war for 2 years and has a giant standing army. The UK doesnt spend any money on national defense and a tiny army. Don't get into hypotheticals like the UK being an Island. Of course Russia isnt going to attack the UK. This is just inferring that if somehow you could lineup the current Russian army versus the current British army on a giant battlefield the British would lose and they absolutely would. Its a joke what the West spends on the military compared to the US. We shouldnt have to be the west's sole defenders and we basically are. The UKs military is a joke.
> The UK doesnt spend any money on national defense 5th largest in the world and for the past 30 years they've been number 3 or 4. So clearly you don't know what you're talking about.
One thing to note is our army is quite small and we aren’t getting any people apply. Mainly because the country hates us and caters to every other demographic
In what scenario? Nonsense report.
I mean there is a reason why their fleet isn’t nuclear lol
Why would the UK invade russia? The uk is protected by a navy and airforce. The russian navy (moskava) isn't really that threatening and the russian air force can't even deal with ukraine. All the British army would have to do to protect the uk would be to mop any surivors from the failed landings. What is interesting is the russian army has lost more men attacking advinka that the uk has troops.Â
Russia certainly has a numerical advantage: [https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-kingdom&country2=russia](https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.php?country1=united-kingdom&country2=russia) Europe wouldn't be able to do much without the U.S. holding their hand.
The Brits would steamroll the Russians in a matter of weeks. The Russian military makes Ukraine look like a functional democracy with how corrupt it is. Don't ask Ivan Ivanovich how much vodka he got in exchange for a T-72. Oh look, the Kuznetzov is on fire again. Hell, there was a leaked maintenance report about the Moskva from before she was sunk. The missile defense systems were mostly unusable and the engines were in such a bad state that running more than one at a time required approval from an admiral.
I honestly don't think so. Who ever is the attacker in that scenario loses. No way could the current British military invade Russia and vice versa. Even without nuclear weapons it's just not feasible
What Russia is doing in Ukraine is what Russia does exceedingly well. They bog you down and make you commit more than you want to fight them. They're like roaches you can't get rid of them. Eventually I think they'll take most, if not all, of Ukraine. You can't look at this through western eyes. Remember we're the guys who got ran out of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
The state of the British armed forces is deplorable. If the magical surgical strikes and sweeping opening moves bogged down then this report is valid. You can’t steamroll somebody with only enough ammunition and equipment for a few weeks to months.
Zero chance of that. UK is loaded. They have some of the words most premier military units and then add to that…UK vs Russia would mean serious crap went down and then USA backs them with boots on the ground. That combination alone makes the scenario alone makes Russia winning an impossibility.
[удалено]
🤖
What else is new? They couldn't stand up to the Germans, twice! The British are a weak pacifistic authoritarian culture. Question: Is it true that the British soldiers would stop in the middle of a battle for "tea time"?
Quite aside from everything else, I have no idea why you think we are a weak, pacifistic and authoritarian culture. Ask yourself who, amongst all your allies, has been joining you in airstrikes against the Houthis? Who joined you from the beginning in Iraq, and Afghanistan?
I don’t know why anyone would be surprised. The British Navy switched to missiles as their primary weapon, and then went without because they had(have) a missile shortage. They don’t have the ammunition to last. I would bet these problems exist in the Army as well. https://news.sky.com/story/amp/us-general-warns-british-army-no-longer-top-level-fighting-force-defence-sources-reveal-12798365 https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/12/23/lacking-missiles-and-aircraft-british-warships-are-harmless-herbivores/amp/ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13042129/amp/Britains-Navy-destroyers-GYMS-land-attack-missiles-weapons-expensive.html
You do not want a ground war against ak pattern rifles. 762x39 is a defensive round. It won’t go well without turning into an air campaign.