Hey legends, *I know people who have served will see gaps/problems/issues in the rear movement I showed, This is not for you haha, I just was trying to show have elements maintain support in rear movement, If you want to know in forwards.. reverse the video ;) As an independent reporter you make this possible, To support the channel directly. www.patreon.com/willybeatingcancer www.paypal.me/MWilliams745 MERCH www.willyoam.com/

Ukraine is heavily outnumbered in artillery, aviation, drones, and cruise missiles, plus Ukrainian strike capabilities are less far reaching and not as powerful and Ukraine is pulling anyone and everyone off the streets and sending them to the front lines with little training while Ukrainian units are constantly being semi encircled and Ukraine has less losses? This makes no sense. People forget Ukrainian NATO trained brigade got clapped during their great spring counter offensive. Westerners blindly alway claim Ukraine is taking less losses but can never justify how it’s possible when you are outgunned, outraged, outnumbered and out maneuvered.

Trading land for time awaiting wonder weapons to appear and change everything. Sounds like a winning tactic to me ;)

"Russia easily has more losses than Ukraine." Where are you reading this? They're retreating because they're getting smashed with fabs and artillery. It's not strategic, it's survival.

Its a RETREAT Willy , Just say it mate .

Russia has a 7 to 1 advantage in artillery, so Ukraine has 5-7 times higher losses. However, Willy thinks (with what?) that Russian losses are "more likely" higher! Comedy is getting better and better.

'Russia has much higher losses'...this makes no sense whatsoever. When Ukraine are outgunned by artillery 7 to 1, when they have nothing to counter the FAB's with which absolutely devastating, and most injuries are caused by these standoff weapons, how is it actually possible for Ukraine to cause higher numbers of casualties?

At this Time in History , Yes NATO are the baddies!

100 year partnership. 😂😂😂. 100 year ball and chain. 100 yr obligation. 100 yr long excuse to enter the country in foreign wars, and to blame any economic woes on. Wonder if Britain will exist in 100 yrs…

I am always stunned when Willy makes mention of obvious greate losses of Russia. What is so obvious that shows one side with a ten to one advantage in ammunition and artillery. Especially when the American officer in charge of Bakhut said that 80% of his dead and wounded had not even seen a Russian soldier before being hit. What makes him think it obvious that 60 yo soldiers and conscripts ripped off street sidewalks and sent to the frontlines with little or no training and equipment will outfight battle hardened extremely well equipped and with heaps of ammo are going to achieve. Willy do you still think that Russians are using shovels. Tell us about the Fab 3000s and Fab 1500s and 500s and 250s that you mentioned as having devastating effect and how that devastating effect does not harm old and inexperienced Ukrainians. Tell us about the Ukrainian divisions that are now battalions and how Ukrainianbattalions and divisions have been decommissioned because of lack of reinforcements. How do you reconcile that with the 300,000 Russians held in reserve behind the lines... is it all just more Russian PR. Tell us about the Russian forces that have all been reinforced in recent months and how they are succumbing to the weakened Ukrainian kids and pops who have to run away because of lack of ammo or will to support a corrupt nazi regime. When you say the Russians are obviously losing greater numbers you display what is known as cognitive dissonance. If you think or act in opposition to your belief system, tension builds and you become distressed. That distress is called dissonance. I can see that you have started a little bit to accept that Ukraine is losing but cut the crap that Russia is obviously losing more troops. That belief will just make you very sick... stay well legend.

Where did you get the information that Russia has much more losses than Ukraine?

Okay, he don't talk about the killing of Russian prisoners of war by foreigners fighting for Ukraine, the dude is clearly biased.

Why would Russia have higher losses??? 1) Russia has a 5 to 1 Artillery advantage 2) Russia has a 25 to 1 Arial supremacy. 3) Russia has an infinity to 1 Guided Arial Bombing advantage. (up to FAB3000) 4) Iskander vs ATACMS Russia has a 20 to 1 advantage. 5) Air defense Russia has 10 to 1 advantage. 6) As even Tucker Carlson noted, Russia has a 100 million population advantage. How doen this work out for Ukraine.

So basically the new cope is that UA army is not collapsing, they are just trading land for time. Got it.🤭

Not sure how he can still hold to the assumption that Russian losses are greater than Ukraine's when all the 'real evidence' shows the opposite. Most of the rest of his 'analysis' in giving Ukraine any chance of winning rests on this. He doesn't seem dishonest like most Ukraine supporters so , perhaps, to give up that assumption is to give up hope and that's a very very hard thing to do.

@WillyOAM, I'm one of the tiny few US Army veterans who served in a Soviet Motorized Rifle Regiment as Opfor at Ft. Irwin, CA, National Training Center just before the First Gulf War. Willy, Opfor at NTC won every FTX against US forces. Only the 101st Abn came close to beating us with their Apache gunships. US forces trained for combat against Soviets without comms or GPS due to jamming. Do NATO forces do that today? A-10 warthogs accounted for a large % of armor kills at NTC... and I can tell you the psychological effect is massive. The A-10 is called "Satan's Cross" by Serbs, who were targeted by it. We've all but retired the Warthog fleet, Willy. I spent almost a decade as a US Army light Infantry NCO. If anyone thinks the US is anywhere near as lethal as it was 35yrs ago, in the First Gulf War... when we had six months to forward deploy without even harassment, let alone in combat conditions... anyone who thinks the US could beat an Army the size of Turkey today, let alone Russia, is just delusional. It's a very dangerous delusion held almost exclusively by people who've never taken artillery fire, or had a soldier die in their arms.

If Ukraine took land from Russia those same accounts wouldn't be saying trading land for time but rather saying its a Russian rout.

Trading Land For Time Or in other words: Losing slowly

I think Willy has become confused. He is suffering withdrawal symptoms as his whole raison d'etre collapses. He has always believed West good, Russia bad. Sorry Willy u will soon have accept reality. Its difficult but u will cope!

I'm sorry, but this "Land for Time" is a wildly bad take. There are exactly 5 countries on the planet that have the territory to implement this strategy, and only 3 of those countries have the actual resources to do it. The five are, Australia, Canada, China, Russia, and the USA. Australia and Canada do not have the resources to actually do it, be it manpower, or materiel. The idea that Ukraine can do this effectively, is just pants on head stupid. It expresses a fundamental misunderstanding of how you win wars. Let's talk about Clausewitz on this. To win a war, Clausewitz says, you need to defeat the enemy center of gravity. The center of gravity is an abstract idea that defines a nations ability to wage war. When we consider that, MOST countries that are geographically limited, have a CoG that is their military. Why is it the military? The military acts as a gate keeper to the industrial and population centers. If you lose those centers, you can't wage conventional war. So, if your military is defeated, your population and industrial centers are occupied rapidly, before you can recover. In big countries, like Russia, the USA and China, the population and industry is spread out over such a massive distance, that you CAN effectively trade land for time. The loss of one industrial/population center isn't a decisive blow for those countries. Ukraine is not one of those countries. They have neither the population, nor the geographical size to trade land for time. If Ukraine is actually trying to apply a strategy like this, it's a miracle they've managed to hold on as long as they have. Testament to the people doing the fighting I figure, and not so much the dip-shits directing the war from their bunkers.

Sorry mate. I used to teach Soviet Doctrine to US Army officers in the 80s what the Russians are using in Ukraine is NOT soviet doctrine. I have seen instances where Ukrainian officers are rejecting NATO doctrine for the Soviet doctrine that they are familiar with. It seems that neither side is adhering to one doctrine or another. This is being displayed upon the field. I see no use of the Operational maneuver grounds that were the backbone of soviet offensive doctrine in the break through. Also I am curious as to how you arrived at the notion that Russian losses are higher than Ukrainian. Data from the uk and inside Russia says different.

Ukraine aint fighting the Soviet union , Your talking about modern Russia who have been studying NATO's tactics and they adapted they're own tactics to fight ISIS in Syria , And they adapted to defeat the NATO backed forces in Georgia and Chechnia which is why they have so much modern weaponry still in development and field testing , The Russians are a lot more advanced than they where when I was training to fight them , I wouldn't pin your hopes on Ukraine winning this one , It'll go nuclear before Russia lose,

Willy, as a military person how can you justify saying at the same time that: Russia has mich higher losses and Russia has an advantage in manpower, artillery and air superiority? Furthermore WHY would the side that inflicts more casualties and that has been continuously mobilising theoughout two years of conflict have an urgent need in manpower vs the other side that had lost x10 the manpower being happy with the troops they have? Please explain

Cokainsky must be shitting his pants right now

I have tried to follow what is happening in Ukraine and the common thread is that no one has managed to predict what the Russians will do. The Russians are constantly surprising, changing tactics and coming up with new weapons and I am absolutely convinced that Ukraine will be forced to surrender completely unconditionally.

One day people like Willie will realize their responsibility in the losses of hundreds of thousands of ukranian lifes by cheering for the loosing "Team". It's not a game, it's war and russia doesn't play.

100 year partnership? What's the Ukrainian word for delusional?

And again, WHY are Russia's losses much higher? Literally - for what reason are Russia's losses higher? How exactly does Ukraine compensate for Russia's superiority in artillery, aviation and Ukraine's lack of superiority in drones? Due to which factors are Russia's losses higher?

Russia has far more looses 😫😫 but but 1.Russia is not scavenging the earth for weopon 2. Russia has Limited Aerial supremacy 3. Ukraine is on Martial Law Yet are hunting for tank brigadier from streets 4. Russia is the one moving forward. I have elementary knowledge of math but I also know 1+1 ain’t freaking 11

Russia having the fire power and manpower advantages are the one having more losses? Doesn’t make sense, Willy.

Land for time? Seems like bodies for time to me. How do you withdraw with drones flying around?

Sorry Willy, you just received my first thumbs down with this video, Russia taking more losses than Ukraine, yea, right. Are you being sponsored by the BBC or CN or Zelensky himself? Something changed here.

I've been having problems with my rear movements too but i'm beginning to suspect it is because im lactose intolerant

Iam bit confused didn't Russia run out of ammo and fighting with shovel 2yr ago and Ukraine winning the war?? Sorry wil are U proud of Australia involvement in Afghanistan as a Australia l am ashamed of Australia involvement and my grandfather who was in Gallipoli and gased in the trenches in France a true ANZAC would be ashamed to

Pay attention! As part of the Australian defence, Willy participated in the LOST war in Afghanistan. Now, he will teach the rest of the world about Soviet doctrine! Fair dinkum!

How can you believe Russia has higher casualties, they have 10 times the firepower

Willy must feel like he was hit by a comments FAB

Its very improbable that Russian loses are greater than Ukrainians.

For the record look at the village Hlyboke... Ukraine have already lost two brigades there. Thats a village of like 30-60 dwellings. They are onto their third Brigade there trying to retake a few treelines. Thats 5,000-10,000 men, now are they all KIA? No. but withdrawing two brigades in 3 weeks, means theyve lost their combat capability.

Yeah willie you did the training and your training ended in defeat every place you have been

I'm biased towards Russia, but still, whole war, i don't understand the notion that russians "likely taking heavier losses"? Majority of losses are from artillery and aviation. And Russia have clear advatages in both of them, according to Ukraine, especially since active use of FABs now. Drone-wise at least doesn't seems like Ukraine have advantage, many times ukranian sources complained about russia having advantage there too. And, why wouldn't we, if we able to outproduce shells and there were all kinda effort in develop drone production too. Also, mobilisation effort, in Ukraine mobilisation started immediatly and never stopped. Current project about additinoal mobilisation are exactly that - additional, to constantly ongoin one. Russia did one wave and that's it. Which country has hundred of videos if people being kidnapped from the streets? So like, outside of claims by Ukraine where it's coming from? Open source stuff about heavier equipment losses? Even if i believed they are unbiased, and accurate, and have representative statistics, still if you have a use more equipment, you gonna lose more, it's okay. Like, remember during 2023 offensive when ukranians after losing some armor started using "advanced tactics" of moving forward on foot? Like yeah, smart, you not gonna lose armor, if you don't use it, but i doubt that positivly affect your losses numbers. Also, apply the same logic of (PR vs tactical withdraw) to russian actions in Harkov in Kherson. Screw PR, we just withdrew from disadvantages position giving up a much land as needed. PR-wise huge hit, but military wise it made a lot of sense. I think it demostrate what approach our command uses, so like, don't you think it affect losses numbers too?

Trading land for time? so you mean losing. Why not just say losing?

Willy how in the hell is Russia losing more men with overwhelming fire power an air force, better trained, more motivation, more men. WTF

Soviet tactics: that's exactly what Sirsky does. He graduated well before 1990.

Победа России. Россия одержит верх

How do we conclude that Russia’s losses are "obviously higher"? More artillery, absolute air superiority, more trained and motivated soldiers... but still higher casualties? Yes, some would say that the casualties in the offensive are higher than in the defense, but I would say that’s not axiomatic. If you are sitting in positions for many days and you are leveled with aerial bombs and artillery and no one rushes to throw masses of infantry and vehicles to attack? Look at the prisoner-to-prisoner ratio on both sides, look at the body-to-body swap between the two sides, and then you’ll at least have a rough idea of who has the most casualties. Spoiler alert: ratio and truth 1:5 - 1:6, but not in the way that Zelensky wants.

How is the Russian Air Force underperforming? This is what an Air Force looks like against a real air defense. Something NATO never had to deal with.

Check out 200 exchange numbers, Willy. There's indeed 6 to 1 proportion, but not in Ukraine's favor.

russia has higher losses ?based on what ? ukraine with lower losses needs forced mobilization and sealed borders and russia with higher losses does not need that ? who are you fooling willy ?ukraine has much higher losses just based on these 2 simple facts

Mate do you have experience withdrawing from the Taliban 😂

''Russia most likely have higher losses.'' Are you kidding Willy? Just look at how many people Ukraine mobilized and how many more they need to mobilize. It's not even because of the fact that Russia is bigger country, it's because Ukrainian losses, at best, are 5 times higher than Russia's losses. Firepower is huge factor in attritional warfare.

Notice how sane the comments are before the nafo redacts come around.

May Ukraine continue to trade land for time all the way to polish border

Russia has more men, more resources, more military equipment of every type and unbreakable resolution to fight

Russia has much more losses is the equivalent of saying: "Ukraine is buying Wallstreet!". Propaganda only works when you same measure of believability to it.

100-year partnership? THIS WILL BE RROKEN. Show me one political situation that survived 100 years, it is stupid beyong believe.

First you say you don’t believe the kia figures provided by each mod but then as expected you say Russian losses are higher….just clarify on that one….do you have a reliable source(not uk mod) on dead figures or its just you ‘think’ Russians have more losses..

Soviet doctrine was not about sustaining heavy losses. Counter to popular belief, the Soviets did not just throw away human life. Machines could be wasted, but not men.

WILLY ! HAVE YOU NO SHAME? YOU'RE MAKING US ALL LOOK STUPID AND BLIND. WE ARE WRONG.

Russia can't have higher losses as it enjoys significant air, artillery, drone and armour superiority i.e. firepower superiority. The Ukraine clearly has no defence against Russian firepower and it goes against all emprical modern military historical evidence that the party which suffers from a significant firepower inferiority is capable of inflicting the highest losses during a war - this simply does not happen in modern warfare. The Ukraine is losing and losing bad due to the significant differences in firepower and industrial output between the two beliggerents.

Where does this idea that Soviet and later Russian army doesn't have NCOs comes from?

Can you apply some basic logic to this sentence: Russia has much higher losses? How can they have higher losses when they are absolutely dominating the skies, pounding the enemy with FABs?! Then, has artillery dominance like 10x in the number of shells fired daily?! Just these two things compared give you a good picture.

Willy am sorry to say this but how are the Russians casualties much more than Ukrainian?? Most soldiers dying this war are not in face to face combat but thru bombs and arteriliary. Russia has superiority in everything, be it bombs, aircraft etc. Except by magic there is nowhere Russia can be losing more...

Russia can't have more losses, simply because Ukraine is running out of men. Ukraine OFFICIALLY had 5 rounds of drafts, each of them between 200k and 400k. So, at least 1-1.5 million troops. That ON TOP of 700k troops Ukraine had on February 24th, 2022. And those troops, only until recently, were fully armed and trained. In other words, IF Ukraine have NOW issues with drafting, after having over 2 MILLION troops, then Russia's losses (according to YOU), would be at least 1 million. Well, that doesn't look like they do, because Russia only drafted 300k troops, and they had at maximum, 400k troops in Ukraine. 1 million casualties, means that Russia lost ALL of their 700k troops, PLUS 300k more...plus 700k that are RIGHT NOW in Ukraine. So, Russia lost 1 million troops, and they have 700k NOW. That is 1.7 million troops dead, wounded and currently active...but that is impossible, because Russia only called up 300k reservists. We can add 500k more volunteers, sure...but even so, that doesn't cut it. So, Ukraine is LYING, they lost easily 7-8 times more then Russia, and Russia lost, according to every single PROPER Western researches and polls and following social media in Russia and abroad, as well as checking every single obituary in Russia...they found 57k Russian dead, potentially up to 90k, if adding some errors. You are delusional Willy...highly delusional.

Willy could you please let me know how you feel about your friends in the chosen company under the command of the 59 brigade. They are all getting charged for war crimes and they are that smart they filmed themselves doing this 😂😂

Trading territory for time is basically a retreat because it’s going badly.You can’t make a silk purse out of a pigs ear.

4:47 - Why would Russia have higher losses?

This 3:1 casualties rate is a nato doctrine, it isn't at all a reality stat. World War doesn't meet this ratio infact it's far off it. The ratio might have been true for USA vs militia in other counties seeking regime change but doesn't ring very true to peer armies. Nato has never fought a country that has more firepower, or an army for that matter so to just apply these ratio senselessly is shocking

What will Ukraine be trading land for time for? There is no one is coming to help them and the weapons are drying up.

I think the Russians tried to get to New York by July 4th purely for the meme.

When the war started - Ukr outnumbered RF forces in Ukraine

Cope on brother.

“This century is probably going to belong to the south. Bravo Willy that is the smartest thing I have heard you say so far.

Willy, during the Cold War, US Doctrine as described in FM 100-5 (AirLand Battle) described "trading land for time" which was the American solution to Soviet superiority of armor and artillery. This cause problems between American commanders and their European NATO preference for Follow On Forces (FOFA) that would quickly recover the land that was given up during "tactical withdrawals". Fifty years ago when I served as a cavalry officer in Germany, I could attest to the problems we had with German officers regarding our doctrine. I would guess that some Ukrainian officers would not like the "land for time" concept, but not all Ukrainian-born officers are fighting for Kiev. A good many Ukrainian-born officers wear the White-Blue-Red insignia out of free-choice and fight for their homeland AGAINST Kiev. This is a civil war which often pits Ukrainian against Ukrainian. Sad loss of life.

I seriously doubt Russian losses are higher than Ukrainian ones - not even close. Not with all the non-returned ordnance dropped in Ukraine and the terrible imbalance. If Russia wanted losses, they would make an arrow offensive. I think rather the Russian losses are LOWER than the Ukrainian ones. I har something of 7:1 - that is 7 Ukrainians for every Russian. The glide bombs are brutal. Also does not help to be out of anything on the Ukraine side. Ukraine treading land for time makes sense - but it is a dead end. There are no fortifications to fall back to and they have no material regardless of what they do. They SHOULD have done that - LONG time ago. Now, they can retrieve all the way to Lviv and hope to have a dense enough army there to make sense. And maybe by then there are some consumables and most importantly ammunition there. Nope, they dropped it a long time ago. This is now Hitler's retreat from Moscow all over again, after the german army was burned out by the "not one step back" doctrine that cost them dearly (as did Rommel in Africa).

Mate a Russian army is a proper engine. Its not a bunch of Ukrainian forced personnel that don't wanna be there. You can't compare ukrainian brigades with proper brigades.

Have just come in to read the comments...

Willy, Russian generals are smart enough to find the best way, they are not an educated So your picturing them as amateurs tells us actually more about quality of your analysis

The Ukrainian command is not capable of a tactical retreat. For one simple reason, the head of the Ukrainian command is a peaceful man, with great distrust of his surroundings. Zaluzhny spoke about the need for tactics to save the army from unnecessary losses. Zaluzhny was accused of almost treason, removed from office and is now in Britain. Sirsky, who was put in his place, forbade even thinking about withdrawing troops from Avdiivka, which was close to the encirclement. As a result, the garrison received permission to retreat from Avdiivka after it voluntarily left its positions. The retreat of units without the cover of armored vehicles, with a small amount of ammunition, and beyond the limits of exhaustion from months of constant combat without rotation, led to heavy losses. Many in Ukraine blame the fall of the entire Avdiivka front for the fact that during the existence of Avdiivka, no one has prepared a position in case Avdiivka falls. But at the same time, these people do not think about other things. Even if you have prepared positions, they won't be able to fight on their own, without people. The fall of this section is associated with the destruction of combat-ready brigades in Avdiivka. The remaining troops of the Armed Forces of Ukraine could not contain those parts of the Russian army that fought with more trained brigades in Avdiivka. And which were defeated because of Zelensky's inability to declare a retreat. Meanwhile, Zelensky puts Zaluzhny Sirsky in place. That Sirsky, to whom the Ukrainian soldiers gave the nickname "the butcher". That Sirsky, about whom even the people of Azov say that more Ukrainians died because of his orders than because of the actions of the Russian army. What is the reason for this choice? Due to the fact that Sirsky will not try to conduct tactical retreats. Saving the lives of some soldiers unnecessary to Zelensky, in exchange for precious Ukrainian territory. Why does the occupation of new territories not lead to terrible losses in the Russian army? For the reason that the assault on Ukrainian positions is not carried out by tanks infantry. The assault on Ukrainian positions is carried out first by long-range artillery and aviation, with the participation of missile systems. After the middle-level artillery and mortars. After the drones. And after that, the rest is cleared by small assault groups. If the assault groups encounter resistance, the artillery processing continues. The lack of air defense and artillery in Ukraine does not give the AFU the opportunity to resist this tactic. But the most important thing that is constantly reducing the Ukrainian army is the constant redeployment of the most trained units to traps prepared by Russia, such as Volchansk. this leads both to the destruction of these units and to breakthroughs of the front in those places from where these troops were withdrawn. The actor Zelensky is apparently completely unable to understand the consequences of such actions. He learned that the main thing is to impress people. Sirsky will not interfere with Zelensky's wishes. He remembers what happened to Zaluzhny

Trading land for time in old days was called Losing

I find it hard to believe Ruskies are taking more casualties given how big is their advantage in air bombs and artillery

Which MOD are you referring to when you say 'the MOD"?

its costing the west much more money to make weapons and ammo, and then also costs the west also more to transport the weapons and ammo. the west labour costs are higher, investor earnings, CEO takes from earnings all add up to making costing higher, though these elite in America making bank from these costs. Russia has lower costs to build ammo and weapons, lower labour costs, less transport costs are just some big differences, a lot of it comes to much lower costs of living in Russia. Russia is out producing the west also from what I'm hearing from other channels.

@4:00 Why would you think Russia's losses are higher? There are NO reasons to think this is the case and countless to believe it is not.

Matt, this is the level of casting, we want and need to see. Keep it coming ... and beware of Netanyahu's plans.

Time for what? Forget about that. There will be no trading.

Who else comes here just to hear what kind of copeium the losing side made up this week 😂

Based on the level of destruction the Russians inflict on these strongholds it looks like they are advancing until the ukrainians defend a location then they bombard it till nothing is left or the Ukraine retreat. If that is the case the Russian casualties wouldn't be that high. They'd only lose guys on the initial engagement and the mop up operation.

What is the reason for Russia having “much higher losses”, would you please care to explain?

This is a comment made before watching all the way through, I'm impatient. It depends on what ground they give up. They very well could give up the best defensive positions and be left with flat fields of flowers and tall grass. I don't know about you, but tall grass and flowers isn't much to hide behind. Then if this is the case, by the time they do get the F-16s and, ......, a new army, Russia could have basically made an impenetrable wall.

Frozen? Is just a "western" view :D Russia don't gona froze nothing before they achieve theyr goals!

I'm up, he sees me, I'm down :) Saying that Russia can't sustain the losses was what the Wehrmacht thought, 20 million later the red army is flying a flag on the Reichstag.

The problem we Willy is that what he was expecting from his side (Ukraine) is very disappointing such that he changed from pro ukraine to Abit neutrol though not purely...

Starting to talk about land for time is just Ukrainian cope for how badly things are going on the battlefield.

Less train for Soviet Soldiers? You kidding me right? Their the ones that are getting the most combat experience.

They're not trading anything, they're getting demolished.

Take care Willy ❤️

People think Russia nwin againt german army by numbers. But in reality Russian were outnumber most of the time umtil the battle of kursk ended . WHat Russian did was defeat in detail

I doubt that russian losses are more than Ukraine. For one thing most casualties are from artillery, drones or FABS GUESS WHO HAS THE ADVANTAGE IN THESE WEAPONS?

Willy do u consider all these wars us and by extension Australia been massive success? I mean if the fight was about taking resources then maybe it was yeah