Putin dismisses importance of U.S.-supplied weapons to Ukraine
nbcnews.com
A Russian missile attack killed two civilians in an apartment building in southern Ukraine on Wednesday, local authorities said, as President Vladimir Putin dismissed the importance of a new U.S.-supplied weapon that Kyiv used to execute one of the most damaging attacks on the Kremlin’s air assets since the start of the war.
Putin told reporters that Russia “will be able to repel” further attacks by the U.S.-made Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS.
Ukraine claimed it used those missiles to destroy nine Russian helicopters, as well as ammunition, an air defense system and other assets at two airfields in Russia-occupied regions on Tuesday.
You are viewing a single comment
I mean, when your whole war strategy is to use the bodies of your people to soak up all the ammo of your enemy I'm pretty sure anyone supplying ammo to them is going to make a pretty big difference.
Counterpoint: Russia lost something like 30 million people in WW2 and still won.
You're gonna need a lot of bullets
Big difference between these two wars: in WW2 Russia was being invaded and they had one of the worst winters on record which is what really stopped the Germans (and also Germany fighting on two fronts) but I’m not a historian so please correct me if I’m wrong.
Germans were not prepared for winter fighting and had stretched their supply lines thin. It was more then just the cold that stopped the Germans.
Fun fact, Nazi Germany was more reliant on horses then armour throughout ww2 for transport.
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/index.html
That said, the Soviets being invaded was the decisive factor in the war. The invaded will always fight harder then the invader. For the most part anyways.
The Germans were already loosing by 1943, wasting tons of resources doing the holocaust as well. The Western allies opening up the Italian and French fronts only increased the speed of this.
I've heard some Ukranians refer to this as their own" great patriotic war ." And its true.
This war will define this generation of Ukranians like how that war defined those generations who fought it, and made a legacy for those who would come after them.
"than" "Losing"
There is a difference.
Counter counter point: the Polish Soviet war of 1920 is a far better point to begin any comparisons, seeing as russia was the aggressor, and was humiliated multiple times.
A second double counter point, sources certainly vary on exact figures but a lot of the “Russians” killed in WW2 were the Ukranians, especially in the early stages as they were essentially sacrificed with minimal defenses to stall for time. They’re not exactly looking to that ever happening again.
Russia also got their dick kicked in in Finland under similar circumstances during the winter war.
Anyhow, i made an offhanded comment and went to sleep and wasn't expecting it to gain traction, so I feel the need to clarify:
I'm absolutely not pro Russia or defeatist towards Ukraine, I'm just saying that historically speaking Russia generally has no issues throwing a sickening amount of bodies at a problem to see if that fixes it
Every Russian thinks they're gangster until the snow starts talking Finnish.
The Sowjet Union (not just Russia) lost 13 million soldiers during the Second World War, over the duration of about 6 years.
Counter-counterpoint: we have a lot
You can hardly even compare WW2 to the Ukraine conflict. Very few variables are the same.
The only major similarity is that Russia hasn't changed their tactics or command structure that much.
Unless Russia gets invaded directly, it's highly unlikely that they will be able to mobilize as many bodies as they did in WW2 anyway.