Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this the second General who was killed?
Do generals often get killed in wars? I would think rank hath some benefit…
I think the generals have had to get closer to the front lines to try to unclown the Russian military clown show.
In WW2 about 40 US general and flag officers died. Many though were plan crashes incluidng Nathan Beford Forrest III and a guy named Stonewall Jackson.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._general_officers_and_flag_officers_killed_in_World_War_II
That is really not a lot.
IN WWII we lost 3 2 star and up flag officers to hostile fire. Russia has already equaled that number. It really is a lot.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Even if every one of those stats were exaggerated by 50%, this has been an unmitigated disaster for the Russians.
If they ARE correct numbers, then it’s even worse than a disaster.
Too bad we don’t have a functional ABM system right now that could reliably stop Russian missiles. Because this would be THE time for NATO to strike Russia and end them as a threat once and for all.
I think the Chinese are evaluating whether now might just be the time to go after Siberia.
The Chinese aren't worried. They get all of Russia as their serfs if Putin survives.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this the second General who was killed?
Do generals often get killed in wars? I would think rank hath some benefit…
I think the generals have had to get closer to the front lines to try to unclown the Russian military clown show.
In WW2 about 40 US general and flag officers died. Many though were plan crashes incluidng Nathan Beford Forrest III and a guy named Stonewall Jackson.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._general_officers_and_flag_officers_killed_in_World_War_II
That is really not a lot.
Anonymous wrote:https://mobile.twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1500978613113524229
Another embarrassing planning and logistics failure
Anonymous wrote:Even if every one of those stats were exaggerated by 50%, this has been an unmitigated disaster for the Russians.
If they ARE correct numbers, then it’s even worse than a disaster.
Too bad we don’t have a functional ABM system right now that could reliably stop Russian missiles. Because this would be THE time for NATO to strike Russia and end them as a threat once and for all.
I think the Chinese are evaluating whether now might just be the time to go after Siberia.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Russia is going to have to rely largely on China for imports of materials, but the longer this goes on, the more it will drag on the global economy. I wonder how much China will tolerate that?
China will cooperate for a while. Then it will get too hot for them. China is owned by the West. They could survive a collapse of their trading but it would be hard for them to bear.
Funny. I thought that it was the other way ‘round.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this the second General who was killed?
Do generals often get killed in wars? I would think rank hath some benefit…
I think the generals have had to get closer to the front lines to try to unclown the Russian military clown show.