No objectivity is demonstrated when you narrate with invective and denigration.
Facts, not insults, prove points.
From the same article/headline posted: "U.S. and European multiple launch rockets alone aren’t enough to put Ukraine on the front foot for a counteroffensive."
You believe that double figure Russian Generals have been killed in the past 4.5 months?
I don't believe it.
How do you know that "Russia has about twice the number of Generals, on average they are less experienced (aka expendable), and are often deployed in theatre."?
Double figure Russian Generals have been killed
I made no representation on number of Russian Generals killed.
FWIW, it's lower than figures cited by Ukraine, other posters here, etc.
According the BBC last month, they confirm just 4 Russian Generals killed, and also report that 3 Ukraine-claimed kills (of Russian Generals) are disproved/discounted, as those "dead" generals subsequently appeared in public.
American Generals generally have 25+ years experience and are rarely close to action.
"Following the Vietnam War, high ranking officers were rarely placed in vulnerable positions, such as on the battlefield. Instead, they occupied more strategic positions in places like the Pentagon. These days it takes a long time to become a [US] general - 25 years... The army will not put someone with 25 years training on the field." -Richard Kohn, Military Historian at University of North Carolina
Russia has about twice the number of Generals
The approximation is based on Wiki and other sources reporting that in 2008, Russia had 1107 Generals. And in 2020, that the US had 653 Generals.
On average [Russian Generals] are less experienced
See above. Russian and American ranks do not line up. Officers with the rank of General in the Russian army can have less experience because their functional role is lower:
"Col. John Barranco, senior Marine Corps fellow at the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security at the Atlantic Council, cautioned that we shouldn’t think of these Russians who’ve been killed as holding the stature of three- or four-star generals in the U.S. The closer analogy would be brigade-level or deputy-division level commanders."
Expendable
Because they're forward-deployed and being KIA.
Are often deployed in theatre
"[There is] a flaw in the way the Russians organize their armies. In the American army, in many ways the key figures are junior officers and noncommissioned officers — sergeants, lieutenants, captains — and in the American army, even though there is a chain of command, the rules of engagement are such that people at lower levels are given a great deal of freedom and encouragement to make decisions on the spot, to make a call and do something and respond to emergencies and basically roll with the punches or the bullets, whatever it is. In the Russian army, that kind of structure does not exist. And so generals go forward in a situation like this.”
-John McLaughlin, former Acting Director of the CIA
“When your planning begins to fall apart because of the nature of war... you have to have a very senior person who comes forward,” he said. “And so you’ve got a lot of senior [Russian] officers out there, exposed or having to move up close to what’s going on to try and unravel the various problems that normally should have been sorted out by a much more junior, lower level commander.”
-Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, former Commander of U.S. Forces in Europe
Miss the part that shows that the Russian generals are more forward deployed and are considered expendable.
You're underestimating the stupidity of the European liberal.
These morons would gun their own people down in the streets before they abandon their idiotic green globalist ideologies.
Stupidity is saying this war would be over in 5 days
Let this go. Whatever point you were trying to make became tired about 100 taunts ago.
In any case, if someone in the thread posted that estimation, they were echoing what US Intelligence stated at the time:
(CNN) US intelligence officials are concerned that Kyiv could fall under Russian control within days, according to two sources familiar with the latest intelligence.
The sources said that the initial US assessment from before the invasion -- which anticipated that the Ukrainian capital would be overrun within one to four days of a Russian attack -- remains the current expectation.
Have we ever seen a more inept army than what Russia brought to Ukraine? Are these peope bad at war or what? Long tank, truck convoys rolling down the road getting blown up one by one how damn stupid is that? How many of their generals have been killied, ya don't have generals that close to the action....DUH!!!!!!!
Russia will never rule Ukraine so they have already lost. Thinking they could tells us just how damn stupid these people are. Never be a Russian flag waving in Kyviv. Russian has lost any hopes of rulling Ukraine, that isn't going to happen and it should be real obvious.
Russia has lost close to 50, 000 soldiers, TONS of equipments and what have they gained? If the aliens arrive there will be no Russians in my fox hole, they can't fight.
In that case the US/ Ukraine getting kicked out of virtually all territory Russia wanted to begin with is certainly an interesting military strategy. A brilliantly executed surrender of territory if I ever saw one.
Russia will never rule Ukraine. you honestly can't see that, really?
Why not be open to negotiation and diplomatic solutions? Wouldnt you agree that the fastest way to peace in this conflict would be a deal that is satisfactory to both sides?
Because the US is not interested in peace. They make huge profit from basically every war and would also gladly have the EU and Russia done and wasted.
I will never believe that the US genuinely cares about Ukraine. Americans don't even care about other Americans, why should they care about Ukrainians...
The only way this could end diplomatically is if some German politician in charge would get off his knees and tell the US to back off and open up Nord Stream 2.
A "German politician?" I've read history books about war in Europe. German politicians are note worthy of doing more harm than good. However having said that, I don't see anyone one else on the continent that impressed me much with their statesman's ability.
My above is mostly directed to the largest nations in Europe. The small to medium size nations are making the larger/richer nations look bad. They have smart and motivated leadership. Their only problem is their nations are small and don't have the same cache as their larger neighbors.
Miss the part that shows that the Russian generals are more forward deployed and are considered expendable.
See last two quotes of prior post, q.v.
This should be non-contentious.
One can quibble about numbers, but it is unequivocal Russian Generals are suffering unusually high attrition.
No Army wants to lose soldiers, especially Generals.
By 'expendable', what is meant is the Russian Army is clearly prepared to lose Generals by virtue of them being commonly placed in high-risk environments.
A great many articles have been recently written about higher casualties among Russian Officers being due not only to supply of American material and intelligence, but primarily from failures in Russian supply chain logistics, poor and imprudent communications, and hierarchical short-comings in command structure.
"Russian commanders have long operated much further forward and take a more hands-on approach to leadership than their American counterparts" -Charles Bartles, Research Director for US Army Foreign Military Studies Office
“[Russian] units are smaller, and so officers have responsibilities that in the U.S. military are done by NCOs [noncommissioned officers]. “hey have far more officers in the military than we do. They don’t have a strong NCO corps. As a result, officers make more decisions.” -Rob Lee, former Marine Captain and member of a Defense-focused think tank in Moscow
"..With no professional noncommissioned corps and without a culture that promotes initiative in junior commissioned officers, more senior officers have to get out of their vehicles and move to the fronts of columns to find out the nature of halts, and highly skilled, well equipped Ukrainian snipers have taken advantage of the resulting opportunities to identify and target the senior officers, resulting in at least five general officers and many colonels and lieutenant colonels being killed.” -US Army General Patraeus ret., former Commander of US Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
"There are already reports of mass desertions from different Russian units because this is a real war, it's horrific and no one wants to be sent to their death. "And death is pretty much guaranteed when you are facing something as devastating as the HIMARS, which just rips everything to shreds. "That aspect certainly doesn't boost the Russian soldiers' morale." Pro-Russian military Telegram channels have been abuzz with talk of the HIMARS in recent days. Users—including Igor Girkin, a former Russian intelligence official who commanded pro-Russian forces in eastern Ukraine in 2014—have lamented Russia's apparent inability to stop the weapons, despite the presence of advanced anti-aircraft systems. Haidai said the sensitive Russian targets are now near defenseless. "All these S-300s and other missile defense
Miss the part that shows that the Russian generals are more forward deployed and are considered expendable.
See last two quotes of prior post, q.v.
This should be non-contentious.
One can quibble about numbers, but it is unequivocal Russian Generals are suffering unusually high attrition.
No Army wants to lose soldiers, especially Generals.
By 'expendable', what is meant is the Russian Army is clearly prepared to lose Generals by virtue of them being commonly placed in high-risk environments.
A great many articles have been recently written about higher casualties among Russian Officers being due not only to supply of American material and intelligence, but primarily from failures in Russian supply chain logistics, poor and imprudent communications, and hierarchical short-comings in command structure.
"Russian commanders have long operated much further forward and take a more hands-on approach to leadership than their American counterparts" -Charles Bartles, Research Director for US Army Foreign Military Studies Office
“[Russian] units are smaller, and so officers have responsibilities that in the U.S. military are done by NCOs [noncommissioned officers]. “hey have far more officers in the military than we do. They don’t have a strong NCO corps. As a result, officers make more decisions.” -Rob Lee, former Marine Captain and member of a Defense-focused think tank in Moscow
"..With no professional noncommissioned corps and without a culture that promotes initiative in junior commissioned officers, more senior officers have to get out of their vehicles and move to the fronts of columns to find out the nature of halts, and highly skilled, well equipped Ukrainian snipers have taken advantage of the resulting opportunities to identify and target the senior officers, resulting in at least five general officers and many colonels and lieutenant colonels being killed.” -US Army General Patraeus ret., former Commander of US Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
It always matter when innocent people die.We can only hope that the man that started this will die or taken away from power.
Obama? Nuland? Kagan?
LilliPutin precedes all of these by many years, and took his dirty business from the shadows (Chechnya, Donbas) to the full daylight, and will pay accordingly.
Doing this would be pretty dangerous to Ukraine. From what I gather, Putin is thinking on declaring war on Ukraine to be able to officially mobilize troops. And once this mess has war status, Russia might as well fire missiles on Kiev. And maybe not only Kiev.
"this mess" "war status"
You are hilarious.
Good job!
It looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... but neither side in the Russian-Ukraine conflict has declared war. This has important distinctions in terms of what measures and resources can be applied.
There has been conjecture in the last week that Russia might declare war, partly to justify a draft or mobilization to swell Army ranks. It would not seem necessary for a declaration of war to justify an expanded land grab beyond the Donbass - they are doing that already.
The declaration seems remote now as Russia, instead of a draft, is now requiring 85 districts to provide a "volunteer" battalion. That will add 75K or so additional troops, short-term. But as most would be poorly trained, not sure how useful they'd be - suppose there is always grunt work.
The prolonged war is taking a toll on Ukrainian troops as they suffer massive losses of 200 deaths per day, morale issues, and cases of desertion after being outgunned in terms of artillery and ammunition.
I would like to see the conservative chickenhawks of this thread justify why they think that citizens and military of a sovereign, unaligned nation should submit to the brutal invasion by an authoritarian state, without armed resistance? You guys spew about right to gun ownership, self-defense, liberty and freedom, except when it is needed and supported elsewhere. I am consistent in that tyranny should be opposed at all costs wherever it raises its hideous anus, whether it is by the U.S. government at home or by PUSSR in Eastern Europe.
“It’s quite interesting that in American discourse, it is almost obligatory to refer to the invasion as the ‘unprovoked invasion of Ukraine’. Look it up on Google, you will find hundreds of thousands of hits. Of course, it was provoked. Otherwise they wouldn’t refer to it all the time as an unprovoked invasion.” ~ Noam Chomsky
I would like to see the conservative chickenhawks of this thread justify why they think that citizens and military of a sovereign, unaligned nation should submit to the brutal invasion by an authoritarian state, without armed resistance? You guys spew about right to gun ownership, self-defense, liberty and freedom, except when it is needed and supported elsewhere. I am consistent in that tyranny should be opposed at all costs wherever it raises its hideous anus, whether it is by the U.S. government at home or by PUSSR in Eastern Europe.
Ukraine is not sovereign nation. Why this stupidity repeated over and over again
Ukraine is under total control of the USA and does what it is ordered by the USA
You should consider Ukraine not as a country but as a weapon like sort of bomb, which is used against Russia. Simple as that. Invasion happened not just because Putin is evil but because Ukraine became weapon and Russia was threatened.
They cmplained for many years not to use Ukraine as a weapon and were totally ignored.
All Russia was told Ukraine would become NATO member no matter what Russia thinks. Russia protested and were basically told too fk off
Now we try make Russia evil and Ukraine some kind of victim. Ukraine is not victim
Ukraine is not sovereign nation. Why this stupidity repeated over and over again
Ukraine is under total control of the USA and does what it is ordered by the USA
You should consider Ukraine not as a country but as a weapon like sort of bomb, which is used against Russia. Simple as that. Invasion happened not just because Putin is evil but because Ukraine became weapon and Russia was threatened.
They cmplained for many years not to use Ukraine as a weapon and were totally ignored.
All Russia was told Ukraine would become NATO member no matter what Russia thinks. Russia protested and were basically told too fk off
Now we try make Russia evil and Ukraine some kind of victim. Ukraine is not victim
Ukraine is a thoughtfully prepared and executed project to cut Europe off from Nord Stream 2. Read on Wikipedia how many times Biden, McCain, Rubio, Tillerson, Trump, Grenell, Cruz and others threatened Germany with sanctions if it was to use the new pipeline.
To a point, where Austrian Chancellor and Germany's Foreign Minister had to issue an official statement, that "Europe's energy supply is a matter for Europe, and not for the United States of America."
European tech having cheap and very accessible Russian energy would have been a major boost to European economy and would absolutely go against "America first" policy. So they used Ukraine as a NATO plant to make sure Russia has to do react. All ONLY to turn Europe away from Russia. Ukrainians are gladly sacrificed for the cause.
Miss the part that shows that the Russian generals are more forward deployed and are considered expendable.
See last two quotes of prior post, q.v.
This should be non-contentious.
One can quibble about numbers, but it is unequivocal Russian Generals are suffering unusually high attrition.
No Army wants to lose soldiers, especially Generals.
By 'expendable', what is meant is the Russian Army is clearly prepared to lose Generals by virtue of them being commonly placed in high-risk environments.
A great many articles have been recently written about higher casualties among Russian Officers being due not only to supply of American material and intelligence, but primarily from failures in Russian supply chain logistics, poor and imprudent communications, and hierarchical short-comings in command structure.
"Russian commanders have long operated much further forward and take a more hands-on approach to leadership than their American counterparts" -Charles Bartles, Research Director for US Army Foreign Military Studies Office
“[Russian] units are smaller, and so officers have responsibilities that in the U.S. military are done by NCOs [noncommissioned officers]. “hey have far more officers in the military than we do. They don’t have a strong NCO corps. As a result, officers make more decisions.” -Rob Lee, former Marine Captain and member of a Defense-focused think tank in Moscow
"..With no professional noncommissioned corps and without a culture that promotes initiative in junior commissioned officers, more senior officers have to get out of their vehicles and move to the fronts of columns to find out the nature of halts, and highly skilled, well equipped Ukrainian snipers have taken advantage of the resulting opportunities to identify and target the senior officers, resulting in at least five general officers and many colonels and lieutenant colonels being killed.” -US Army General Patraeus ret., former Commander of US Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
The assertions of three American military men is far from definitive proof.
One can quibble about numbers, but it is unequivocal Russian Generals are suffering unusually high attrition.
No Army wants to lose soldiers, especially Generals.
By 'expendable', what is meant is the Russian Army is clearly prepared to lose Generals by virtue of them being commonly placed in high-risk environments.
A great many articles have been recently written about higher casualties among Russian Officers being due not only to supply of American material and intelligence, but primarily from failures in Russian supply chain logistics, poor and imprudent communications, and hierarchical short-comings in command structure.
"Russian commanders have long operated much further forward and take a more hands-on approach to leadership than their American counterparts" -Charles Bartles, Research Director for US Army Foreign Military Studies Office
“[Russian] units are smaller, and so officers have responsibilities that in the U.S. military are done by NCOs [noncommissioned officers]. “hey have far more officers in the military than we do. They don’t have a strong NCO corps. As a result, officers make more decisions.” -Rob Lee, former Marine Captain and member of a Defense-focused think tank in Moscow
"..With no professional noncommissioned corps and without a culture that promotes initiative in junior commissioned officers, more senior officers have to get out of their vehicles and move to the fronts of columns to find out the nature of halts, and highly skilled, well equipped Ukrainian snipers have taken advantage of the resulting opportunities to identify and target the senior officers, resulting in at least five general officers and many colonels and lieutenant colonels being killed.” -US Army General Patraeus ret., former Commander of US Forces in Iraq and Afghanistan
The assertions of three American military men is far from definitive proof.
You do get that?
Then provide some evidence to the contrary. You are able to do that, right?
