Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 24, 2023 8:33 pm
Putin pretends to let bygones be bygones and things carry on as normal. In 6 months Prigozin has an unforeseen tragic accident.
Putin didn't even wait 6 months. Just two. To the day.
Sandydragon wrote: ↑Sat Jun 24, 2023 8:33 pm
Putin pretends to let bygones be bygones and things carry on as normal. In 6 months Prigozin has an unforeseen tragic accident.
Putin didn't even wait 6 months. Just two. To the day.
Ooft. That's on the nose.
Puja
The way that plane hit the ground, quite literally.
An emergency landing suggests the aircrew trying to land it. That plane just fell out of the sky. Either a bomb or a missile.
Pretty sickening that a whole planeful could be killed to assassinate one man.
Couple of years ago Russia shot down a commercial jet killing nearly 400, you think they give a shit about collateral damage?
Nah, I know they don't give a shit about it, I just thought it was worth raising the point. News coverage was all about one (evil) man dying (probably), not the others, most of whom were probably not deserving of such a fate.
Son of Mathonwy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 24, 2023 10:49 pm
Pretty sickening that a whole planeful could be killed to assassinate one man.
Couple of years ago Russia shot down a commercial jet killing nearly 400, you think they give a shit about collateral damage?
Nah, I know they don't give a shit about it, I just thought it was worth raising the point. News coverage was all about one (evil) man dying (probably), not the others, most of whom were probably not deserving of such a fate.
I suspect several of them the world won’t miss at all. But I’m sure some of the crew were just normal human beings who aren’t neo Nazi thugs
Couple of years ago Russia shot down a commercial jet killing nearly 400, you think they give a shit about collateral damage?
Nah, I know they don't give a shit about it, I just thought it was worth raising the point. News coverage was all about one (evil) man dying (probably), not the others, most of whom were probably not deserving of such a fate.
I suspect several of them the world won’t miss at all. But I’m sure some of the crew were just normal human beings who aren’t neo Nazi thugs
More delights of Moscovite 'culture' I discovered recently:
"боятся - значит уважают" - they fear you it means they respect you
"бьёт - значит любит" - he beats you it means he loves you
I am reminded also of that French saying... "Grattez le russe et vous verrez un tartare" (scratch a Russian and you get a Tartar).
‘The British army has cut by a third the training of Ukrainian troops at a military base in Kent after residents complained about the noise of explosions and gunshots.‘
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:28 am
Imagine being this much of a ****:
‘The British army has cut by a third the training of Ukrainian troops at a military base in Kent after residents complained about the noise of explosions and gunshots.‘
Surely just shift the training to Wales or Scotland?
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:28 am
Imagine being this much of a ****:
‘The British army has cut by a third the training of Ukrainian troops at a military base in Kent after residents complained about the noise of explosions and gunshots.‘
Surely just shift the training to Wales or Scotland?
Mellsblue wrote: ↑Sat Sep 16, 2023 8:28 am
Imagine being this much of a ****:
‘The British army has cut by a third the training of Ukrainian troops at a military base in Kent after residents complained about the noise of explosions and gunshots.‘
The number of complaints military training causes is just bonkers. Some locals kick off about anything.
Basically suggesting that the US's approach to training in Ukraine is woefully underserving to really help the Ukrainians, trying to teach them to fight in the American way when the American way depends on having air superiority, among other factors.
It points out that British trainers are very much preferred because they listen to Ukrainian soldiers, take the actual conditions they're fighting under into account, and adjust their training accordingly.
Basically suggesting that the US's approach to training in Ukraine is woefully underserving to really help the Ukrainians, trying to teach them to fight in the American way when the American way depends on having air superiority, among other factors.
It points out that British trainers are very much preferred because they listen to Ukrainian soldiers, take the actual conditions they're fighting under into account, and adjust their training accordingly.
Interesting. As the piece suggests this would not only benefit Ukraine but taking this knowledge back would give our own armies the ability to fight under different (and very modern) conditions. We hope we will never face those conditions ourselves but it's better to be prepared, I think.
Basically suggesting that the US's approach to training in Ukraine is woefully underserving to really help the Ukrainians, trying to teach them to fight in the American way when the American way depends on having air superiority, among other factors.
It points out that British trainers are very much preferred because they listen to Ukrainian soldiers, take the actual conditions they're fighting under into account, and adjust their training accordingly.
Not the first time that criticism has been made. The Afghan National Army was taught to fight with air and artillery support that if not quite on the same lines as full bore US Army was more than they could provide for themselves. When the US withdrew and that support went, they were a bit screwed (not withstanding lots of issues with corruption etc).
The US has always been about firepower rather than risking its troops. And it’s had logistical ability that is the envy of everyone else. But it doesn’t envisage every having to fight in any environment where it hasn’t got a tech advantage.
Basically suggesting that the US's approach to training in Ukraine is woefully underserving to really help the Ukrainians, trying to teach them to fight in the American way when the American way depends on having air superiority, among other factors.
It points out that British trainers are very much preferred because they listen to Ukrainian soldiers, take the actual conditions they're fighting under into account, and adjust their training accordingly.
Interesting. As the piece suggests this would not only benefit Ukraine but taking this knowledge back would give our own armies the ability to fight under different (and very modern) conditions. We hope we will never face those conditions ourselves but it's better to be prepared, I think.
There’s a lot of effort being put into analysing this conflict, after all Russia is a potential adversary and China isn’t too dissimilar in its doctrine. The big concern for me is the supply chain. Too many reports of equipment stockpiles running low which is not great if our fairly small military were facing a much larger foe.
Basically suggesting that the US's approach to training in Ukraine is woefully underserving to really help the Ukrainians, trying to teach them to fight in the American way when the American way depends on having air superiority, among other factors.
It points out that British trainers are very much preferred because they listen to Ukrainian soldiers, take the actual conditions they're fighting under into account, and adjust their training accordingly.
Interesting. As the piece suggests this would not only benefit Ukraine but taking this knowledge back would give our own armies the ability to fight under different (and very modern) conditions. We hope we will never face those conditions ourselves but it's better to be prepared, I think.
There’s a lot of effort being put into analysing this conflict, after all Russia is a potential adversary and China isn’t too dissimilar in its doctrine. The big concern for me is the supply chain. Too many reports of equipment stockpiles running low which is not great if our fairly small military were facing a much larger foe.
I do wonder if we have any handheld anti-tank weapons left.
