The hi lux.

Hey, if it’s cheap, reliable, easy to repair, able to carry a decent payload, and fast, the conclusion is obvious

It's too bad that Toyota doesn't sell the Hilux in the USA. Just imagine owning the most effective military vehicle of the 21st century

Are you kidding, they keep doing it without them wanting too.

@@connormclernon26 first time im hearing hi-lux and fast in same sentence XD

Ladas lose all three

Logistics creates empires.

@@TR33ZY_CRTM not when it's -30 out

🤣🤣🤣

Toyota's never die

definitely aggree. especially maps with other relevant data, which many have made [like where the front is and what areas is controlled by who] would be helpful

In another video he said a narrow strip between Amarillo and some city in Louisiana. That would be probably the size of Ukraine at bare minimum.

and military A.I. support too.

And our taxpayer dollars on it.

Cough cough the citadel cough cough

I hope not cause they’re still losing and the war is still raging on

@@youtuber9046 Yep, Russia is still losing. Isn't it wonderful? Such a beautiful sight 🇺🇦🤜🇷🇺🤛🇪🇺

And if you add local knowledge advantage...the thunder run can exploit terrain in ways a conquering enemy would consider "impossible" Solid coment.🎩

We can Thank Col John Boyd the creator of the OODA Loop, he was involved in the Tactics for Desert Storm. Stormen Norman wanted to go hi diddle straight up the middle. Cheney and Col. Boyd said NO..... Using Col Boyd's 4th generation war involves combined arms, coordinating Ground, Air, and artillery etc in concert with getting inside the Opponents decision cycle their OODA Loop. Avoiding strong points or obliterating those you can't avoid with Combined arms.... and the 100 hr war was born.

@@ricardokowalski1579 and local resistance to the ones getting 'thunder runned'

@@TobyIKanoby AND local support for the home team doing the thunder. Nothing like thousands of friendly eyes telling you where they stockpiled the fuel...and the vodka. 😁

@@ricardokowalski1579 yeah that's what I said, just in a different way

The older I get the more do I wonder if some Generals played Command and Conquer.

@@CrniWuk I would imagine some would to brush up on there tactics

Yeah man, ti's nothing better than getting in a fast moving light vehicle, smash up some tanks, apcs, artillery and then hightailing it out of there--wash rinse repeat.

Not exactly, one of the successes has been our old Scorpion light tanks. They've kept up with the trucks, and ahead of them are "technicals", recce dune buggies straight out of Mad Max, so fast moving they're a pain to hit. A lesson we were taught from WW2, "The quick and the dead" - it's a quotation from church, twisting the original meaning "the living and the dead" to mean, only the fittest, the fastest, survive. The epitome of that's Musashi's Empty Hand technique, so fast you never knew what hit you. Iaijutsu. I demonstrated that at Warminster, Platoon Commander's Course, School of Infantry. Brought a section half a mile through solid smoke, turned them perfectly, and came out of the smoke in line abreast with the Gurkhas five feet ahead. As big a surprise to me as them, to be frank. They were even looking the other way! I then upped the ante, demonstrating that empathic diplomacy can even remove the causus belli. Before anyone accuses me of being an armchair warrior, I actually did turn a job offer from the SAS down, going on to put the spooky edge in European Diplomacy as the economist in the CFSP team which won the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize. The Regiment deserves an honourable mention, David Stirling was the first to put the fighting edge on the LRDG survival tactics, themselves learned from early egyptologists and TE Lawrence. The difference to American doctrine - at least prior to the Gulf Wars - is that you leave the heavy kit behind. Some of that did come from the hunter units in Nam, knife-fighting berserkers who ditched the uniforms at night, admittedly. The place for armour's in the second wave, the punch through behind the stiletto. The weight of the water behind the shock wave cracking the Sorpe Dam. You don't want the wound to close behind you, but to keep their heads spinning until the halo forms.

@@CrniWuk No, but the board precedents, yes. One of my protégés in school days was Chris Harper, NATO's IMS Commander. Note that the stalemate was broken immediately after they completed the training with UK forces.

Deep Battle is the term, coined by the soviets around ww2

@@Tanador680 well deep battle is concerned cheifly with overall advancement of the front rather than maximum casualties via encirclement as blitzkrieg had taught, the soviets also use all forces in unison rather only armoured vehicles.

and a nice safe feeling having you guys there, when it came time for a passage of lines.

Exactly. I was in 1st Brigade(Raider)HHC 3/64 Mortars in the early 90’s. I think we were the heaviest Brigade in all of NATO at the time. Rampage.

I remember that time, we leveled Iraq to the point where they not only didn't resist but they did anything we wanted for water and food.

Great added context indeed. I knew a veteran older than me who related he was once told he had a life expectancy of around 8 minutes if Russia decided to attack the Fulda Gap. If I recall, I think he was a radioman in a reconnaissance platoon assigned to a border observation post during the 80s. When Russia had moved tactical nukes up and the US was doing likewise.

@@CommeradeZhukov fuck iraq, but that’s still fucked up

humvees, thunder run, drones, himars ... are you sure you are talking about the ukrainian military ?

@@ioandragulescu6063 yes lol wdym Ukraine has Litteraly alll of those have you been living Under a rock

@@ioandragulescu6063 Yes the Ukraine military, using American and European weaponry

@@ioandragulescu6063 they have all of the things you listed like have you not been watching the news?

“Father, forgive them, for they don’t know what sarcasm is ... "

I'm surprised how often this guy makes declaratively ignorant and click bait titles for videos.

Which one?

Quite common in 98% of history lol

@@czarkusa2018 All of them.

Aren't thunder runs blitzkriegs? What's the difference

​@@avionrico6941 that's exactly what I was thinking they missed in the history of bit. Blitzkrieg is literally "lightening war" designed to send armor deep into enemy territory quickly, avoiding heavy fighting at lines of defense and causing chaos along lines of resupply. It's obvious the history of Thunder Runs is a bit deeper than this video would suggest

Germans or more precisely Prussian generals did model their use of amored vehicles doctrine after cavalry raids and fast-charges. It is a mix of armed recon and raid. It is what Attila the Hun did to Ancient Rome.

@@michaelphelps2336 I thought about it some and I think the difference is that Thunder Runs are short blitzkriegs meant to test the enemy and weaken them, rather than relying on the element of surprise to capture large portions of territory and encircle the enemy.

A Blitzkrieg is an early massive combined arms armoured assault designed to breakthrough and envelop units which then get liquidated by slower infantry. A thunder run doesn't stop to surround units. The tip keeps going in a sort of YOLO. This gets inside their command loop. Russian orders expire before they could be sent. The Ukrainians had long gone or the Russian unit had been obliterated. All the chaos makes the enemy think they are isolated, so when the follow-up forces come, they ran or were defeated in detail. Had the Russians in the cities held their nerve the Ukrainians would have had to stop as they weren't meant or could win a stand-up fight as they were in Toyota and hummers. The Ukrainians were driving at over 100kph. If your orders take 5 minutes to formulate, that order is 5km out of position. Blitzkrieg is comparatively slow and shallow.

There's a video of it from the top of an Abrams on KZfaq

@@theotherfoot129 link or title?

@@wote2760 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sK2Bq7Viq77YkWw.html

wow your the man adam i wish i was you magnificent speciman of an alpha male 😍😍😙😙😚😚😚😎

@@anthonymitchell8893 I'm nothing that fancy, I'm not even a tanker. They just needed any extra driver for the simulator. I tried mm u best to run someone over, and finally managed to.

Love the smell of cordite, they should make a perfume of it.

Rommel was doing it before Patton

one would say it's two thousand years old. going fast to attack an enemy underbelly ? Vikings were doing it, cossacks, German warriors from the antiquity etc etc

@@dEcmircEd Not sure it's quite that old, but the Persians and Parthians practiced something similar 1500+ years ago.

I'm by no means an expert on the subject but it was my understanding that this tactic was used by the Germans first. The blitzkrieg or lightning war?

Bill Clinton. That was the problem.

@@cooldudicus7668 kinda sounds like the guy who was actually there thinks it was Ranger arrogance

@@cooldudicus7668 Pretty sure Bill didn't plan and direct that op himself.

This.. fast, accurate, well informed and well planned "aggressive reconnaissance" or raids which have been turning into routes when the conscripts break under the pressure of these well planned attacks.

The key is intuition and to destroy enemy sooner, that enemy destroys U.

I don't think you can do any kind of real "thunder run" without very good ability to do combined arms operations on top of having very good intelligence and planning as you said, as well as flexible and empowered leadership at low levels. All features the Ukrainians possess, as the Americans did in the first Gulf war -- and the Russians are utterly incompetent to do in every aspect.

A raid doctrinally speaking is not much different then a deliberate attack. The main difference being the planned withdrawal. A thunder run has the basic meat and potatoes of a deliberate attack. That's basic FM 7-8 shit unless it's changed since I retired in '11.

Yes they had already probed these areas with Recon and Spec Ops units beforehand. They knew exactly where to hit them.

No it wasnt he only wanted to beat monty it was all about his fucking ego he fucked up the falaise pocket by fucking about and not closing the pincer move on the germans

mean that's the idea, Bite and Hold or Savage and retreat, it's basically Recon by Fire with the intend to create a forward position when possible, bonus points if you're blasting "All Guns Blazing - Judas Priest" or "Highway to Hell - AC/DC" whilst doing so :P

I think this was also part of Rommel's problem, I could be totally wrong though

@@hendrafour7824 I don't think ran out of gas I think he outran the communications lines. The Germans just had no idea where he was.

@@MrJjones543 Thanks for the clarification.

Putins... Thunder Run'd *cue riff* 🎵

And the most important thing is that it can withstand mines, indirect shrapnel and small arms fire as they thunder through.

What have you guys given then like 5? Lmao

@@aztronomy7457 we've delivered 40 of a total promised 60.

@@waterandbridgesmusic people don't understand Australia is huge with a miniscule population of 25m. As a pom I'm surprise you manage to get anything done as 60% of Australians are tough as old boots and get stuff done and 40% are absolute soft c*nts that want to stop the 60% doing anything.

Blitzkrieg*

@@YungSchmutz blitzkrieg is different, that there entire army going forward, this thunder run seems more for a stalemate, it's like a modern version of the Sturm troops the Germans had in WW1 except it's in 2022, they go in to a part of the line and f up everything they can and then retreat back to friendly lines and refuel and rearm, blitzkrieg is just the armys keep advancing day and night, it can't be done with a stalemate cause the entire point of a stalemate means no one is moving anywhere.

@@bruhism173 blitzkrieg was done on local level as well by a single armored division, for example. It could be scaled up or down. It's the same thing. As were Mongol tactics. Every time you operate on open terrain and you have highly mobile units, be it arched horsemen or modern tanks, you can flank and shock and awe. It's been done for over 1,000 years.

@@mrvk39 The interesting thing is WWII Germany didn't use the term Blitzkrieg during the war. The term is so ambiguous that the 2003 Thunder Run counts.

On a side note, that 2003 Thunder Run in Baghdad was made LESS RISKY by first eliminating the Iraqi Medina Division days before. Thunder Runs can't just happen whenever you want to. The right conditions must be there. Just like in Poker, the right combination of cards must be on hand.

yeah, this video perfectly describes the context of that intercepted russian phone call: " They´re everywhere, they´re just fricking everywhere"

@FreddieBob at some point you have to kill the enemy take out their assets..while it my look good if they can regroup and still attack its meaningless. Also you need troops to hold your new lines. Which means you have less to attack with the lands left undefended.

@@daenbrown830 For the 2nd part, it depends on the difference in the front lines lengths. There is a rough number of troops per square area that the front line lives and dies by and as long as they meet or exceed that number, they can position excess troops for attacking over defending. If the new front line is larger than before, then what you say is completely correct. If the new front line is smaller than before (as is the case in this particular instance), then Ukraine now has less of a front line to guard and can bring those excess troops either elsewhere or have them pull more thunder run reconnaissance (or at least regular recon runs...). From the frequent daily chatter of people spotting Ukrainian troops multiple kilometers behind the expected front lines, I'd say they got those excessive troops doing the latter option. As for the first part, dug in defenses are generally one-directional defenses. Meaning, they are weak to attacks from the rear. So, these Ukrainian thunder runs turn around and conclude with the troops coordinating an attack at a fortification from both the thunder run troop at the Russians' rear and the frontal assault team attacking them from the front at the same time. (I've heard chatter of just this happening from the trapped Russian soldiers).

Ahh, I was about to ask the difference of a blitz to a thunder run. Your point makes sense, thank you!

@@daenbrown830 Sorry, wrong. You destroy their ability to fight. 36 hours without food, ammunition exhausted, an average soldier will be demoralised. These untrained conscripts start demoralised, they won't fight back, and they're deadweight as prisoners. Run a tank over their weapons, and leave them to the babushkas.

Was that a thunder run or a run on a bank? They were familiar with that after the depression.

@@fredbecker607 It was a Run on a Bank that used Thunder Runs to get there. Kelly and unit going through the first town was a Thunder Run. They attacked but pushed through leaving chaos in their midst. Oddball and tanks charging through the railyard, they attack but kept going. Did not hold the ground, did not clear all enemy from the area. Just kept moving on.

Everything I know about warfare is from "Kelly's Heroes". I am pretty sure the Writers studied Clausewitz. When the objective is gold and a Tiger Tank I move quickly out of my concientous objector leather fringe hippie vest and right into the nearest Sherman. HIIIIYYYYOOOH!!! Pink paint is still groovy!

I'm liking your positive waves, man.

Woof woof!

I was very surprised that this wasn't actually covered as a relevant contra example of how it goes wrong when mishandled!

The poor logistics (specifically on the way to Kyiv) was in part because of Ukrainian canniness. The reason the Russians took Chernobyl and went for other power stations is that all of the ex-soviet power stations have their own railheads, including the ruined reactors at Chernobyl - those still need material. You probably know rail is how the military moves around within Russia. They thought they would do the same in Ukraine. But the Ukrainians- possibly the civilian workers - sabotaged the railheads. That was why the column had to travel much further by road than they had planned, which they didn’t have enough fuel, or good enough Chinese truck tyres, or in the end even enough food to do.

Also, we now know that hundreds of their trucks and other transport vehicles were equipped with cheap Chinese tires. Astonishing. They quickly came apart in the harsh Ukrainian terrain and weather back in February. For once cheap Chinese made crap had a positive purpose. The vehicles were stuck and this gave the Ukrainians time to mount ferocious resistance.

Shades of operation "Market Garden" in comparison.

It means no worries

A Thunder Run assault seems to just be a special application of a Blitzkrieg assault. It probably wouldn't get far if the enemy is able to respond with aircraft. It only seems practical if the world's largest war machine is paying for all your ammo.

And then British rat patrols ruined everything. LMAO

I too thought that thunder runs sound an awful lot like _blitzkrieg!_

@@pwnmeisterage wait do people actually belive a blitzkrieg to be a tactic XD its not a tactic its the name of the doctrine used by Germany in WW2

@@rtwiceorb770 Doctrine forms strategy. Strategy is implemented in tactics.

I’ve been hearing it related to Soviet deep battle tactics, I would be curious to listen to a Ukrainian General shed some light. It seems to be a simpler assumption that it comes from Soviet era tactics, but there sure are a lot of westerners embedded over there that could have told them about Iraq!

@@Vodgepie1 Cossacks were pretty famous for 'irregular raids and tactics'. It's not impossible someone who really likes cossack history thought this was a good idea, My main opposition with comparing it to the iraqi thunder runs was that they were either a once or twice event, whereas i've heard the ukrainians do it all the time , which is what led to the russians assuming this would be the same and not actually a serious breakthrough.

For the last five years the British military have been training the Ukrainians, Zelensky's first action was to reform Ukrainian command structures to western style ones which disseminates information and allows decision making decentralised. The Ukrainians have used every tactic known, for instance the British made cardboard tanks prior to the Normandy landings and placed them elsewhere making a target for the Germans and an impression we would be attacking elsewhere. The Ukrainians make cardboard HIMARS for Russia to waste expensive rockets on. The move the Ukrainians pulled at Severodonetsk was also British playbook... complete withdrawal from the city and then smashing it to pieces when the enemy moved in from the high ground across the river... then retaking it and holding it until it started to become costly and defensive lines were set up to fall back to. Its strange to see the Russians can't play chess anymore.

Did this idea start with Island Hopping in WW2?

@@Robbini0 it does seem to be an easier leap to make that they are inspired by their own history rather then someone else’s

those are Thunder Claps

Lots of beer then coffee the next morning gives me the thunder runs

Have a "Code Brown!"

Yeah we forgot only the Americans won the battle of the bulge??

Lol leeerrrrooooooyyyyyy

@@aceventura6261 ... oh my god he just ran in

rookies talk tactics pros talk logistics

Russia has never learned that lesson. Even the Soviets had to rely heavily on pillaging resources in most of their wars, capturing tons of nazi equipment and supplies. They kind of suck at logistics which is why the Soviets and imperial Russians usually sruck near friendly cities.

@@percyterry8558 yeah casual people usually forget that. America's, the British empire, and the Roman's greatest weapon was their stellar logistics. America can get boots on the ground just about anywhere in the world at a moments notice, the British could blockade any port and land marines on any beach, and the Roman's could build a navy from scratch over night and raise legions faster then their enemies could destroy them.

Not to mention Russia has little to no real equipment (especially in terms of armor) to show and lacking in basic parts, for example, it’s common to see Russian tanks without any infantry support

This is probably the reason, the US hasn't invested into a new MBT. The Abrams is already 50 years old and I doubt we are ever going to see a new US MBT. Waste of material, you can build 100 Toyota's with the same resources!

@@ericvosselmans5657 we are (hopefully) getting a new tank, the AbramsX

@@Klra_Man The demonstator does look impressive. Is the US Army actually interested in buying these things?

@@ericvosselmans5657 tell this to an actual general and they will laugh in your face. They don't need to replace the Abrams because it is still upgradable and capable of doing its job

It just goes to show you all you need to win a war is a will, a reliable Toyota and a huge set of balls

The only thing wrong with Grant's Vicksburg Campaign is that it had the misfortune to happen in the same war as Sherman's Atlanta Campaign and subsequent March to the Sea 2 years later. Sherman clearly learned everything Grant taught him in Mississippi, but that doesn't diminish the fact that he took the best parts of Grant's Vicksburg strategies (and those of his own follow-up to Vicksburg, in Meridian), corrected or patched the major flaws, built on them, and put them into practice on an even more audacious scale.

Ulysses S. Grant is arguably one of, if not the best military commanders the USA ever produced. I'm so happy he is finally getting more recognition!

A little known fact in Grants 5 battles on the east of the Mississippi was a southern traitor who reported to Pemberton and Johnston back and forth with a stop off in Grants HQ. Give Grants Lees resources and Lees Grants resources at any time in the war. Let’s see who is the better General. In the trenches at Petersburg. Union bakers were baking 110,000 loves of bread a day. Overwhelming men and resources.

@@pauloberle6946 Lee is incredibly overrated by all of you confederate sympathizers. He was a good tactician (though he wasn't exactly going against the highest of competition until he faced Grant) but like rommel, he was a poor general when it came to overall strategy and managing resources. He won some neat victories but at the cost of a bunch of men that he couldn't afford to lose.

@@pauloberle6946 We do not know how many soldiers Lee lost because the South didn't count casualties in the last year of the war. In Appendix II of his book Bonekemper [1] gives total losses of as: Grant: 116,954 Lee: 106,573 Considering Grant was almost always on the offensive and Lee on the defensive the 9% difference is actually much less than one would expect. [1] Bonekemper, Edward H. Ulysses S. Grant: A Victor, Not a Butcher: The Military Genius of the Man Who Won the Civil War. Simon and Schuster, 2010.

The raid on st nazaire for example. Incredible amounts of audacity that exceeds everything I‘ve heard

Yeah, you’re totally right. The Ukrainians are fighting for their very nation while a rag-tag group of Russian soldiers , some not even aware they are in a war, is not going to put up the same amount of resistance given they were, at the end of the day, fighting for money, not sovereignty.

Straight out of the manual...

Probably a lot of surrendering!

Naw, I don't like to say this, it took the Ukraine 5 months to prepare for this offensive, their gained a lot of ground, but the momentum of the offensive is over. Russian troops are already digging in for the winter and the fact that Russian deliberately attacked critical infrastructure doesn't make it easier for the Ukraine. Their still dependent on the western weapon deliverys, but apparently the support of this is shrinking in the west, especially here in Europe were we also preparing for a hard winter

if we are going to pull an "ackshually" then there are probably countless earlier examples of something similar done by cavalry before the panzer was even an idea. The big difference when the US did it was how damn small the actual force utilized was. To take that big of a city with such a small force that quickly was quite a feat. This alone makes it much harder to compare to other historical examples.

@@SuperCatacata ...Why are both of you so keen on accepting the redefinition of the term "Thunder Run?" Upside-down hair guy already told us where/when/how tanks were used to "pop" landmines like bubble wrap. There is a similarity in the outcomes of both the U.S. in Iraq and Germany in Europe. Thoughts?

@@truthsRsung - Funny riposte!

@@truthsRsung indeed, I can think of Cavalry raids in the Classical Era whom would've had similar effects, the Huns and the Mongols where absolutely Lethal with their Lightning attacks by utilizing cavalry to never be where anyone expected them, Rome definitely had a hard time to pin down the Hun invaders and deal with them

@@Voron_Aggrav A bunch of them are descended from Scythians, it's literally in their blood.

And soon nukes if Zelensky gets his way.

@Jefferson Jeff time for my Mojave Big iron Ghetto Outfit

I thought thunder runs were what happened when you eat in Mexico.

@@skipintroux4098 we called that a "Lowland Charge"

@Jefferson Jeff you say that now but just wait till your hair and balls fall off. 😬

Isn’t this also what the Russians did at the beginning of the war?

@@matthewmathis7050 Yes they did but Russia bombed military targets infrastructure and civilians but still didn't do enough. They sent in everything but got bogged down right from the get go because of poor logistics and poor intel. Russia Didn't bomb cell towers or electricity plants meaning your average Ukrainian citizen could take a picture of a Russian convoy and have it geotagged and sent to the Ukrainian military. This means the element of surprise was almost instantly lost because everyone knew when where and how Russian forces were going to attack. Your average Ukrainian citizen can instantly become a government agent because you can easily take a picture post it or send it directly to an informant and there you have it. This is what Modern Warfare is truly like. The same would most likely happen in Russia also but since you're the one invading you instantly lose knowledge on where you're going, how the people will perceive you, what you have to look out for etc.

In Turkish independence war, they done it without armor but cavalry

@@abzerabduabdullah2663 absolute mad lads

Blitz, lightening war. Thunder run, lol! Filtee Americans.

That's a good description. From what I now understand Thunder Runs are fundamentally different from Blitzkrieg or from say Russia's botched roll into Kyiv in February. Thunder Runs are essentially high speed cavalry charges into enemy territory that aim to sow maximum confusion and keep rolling until they get somewhere safe or defendable where they can then be supported. It isn't about specific target objectives per se. So a lot of other comments as missing the mark because they are missing the definition and limits of what a Thunder Run is and isn't. Of course in the process of doing the Thunder Run you may then be able to turn around and achieve many objectives because you can then exploit all that confusion you have shown.

@@joythought Sounds like the exact job the parthian mounted archers were designed to do. Zip past, sow confusion, get the heck out, let the infantry exploit the chaos.

@@joythought but wasn't always cavalry's job to find a breakthrough cause as much chaos as they can as deeper into the enemy real in order for the infantry to exploit it? If you think about tanks are modern heavy cavalry and lighter highly manoeuvrable vehicles the light " scout" cavalry or mounted archers With similar missions to for fill

Chapter 2 Conquering Russia Chapter 3 Defenestrating Putin Chapter 4 Controlling Russia

No command, because Ukrainian Forces and Defenders have Neutralized so many, No Commander wants the job, seen a Commander blamed Putin for the Destroyed cities and killings of civilians with humanity being tortured and rape in Ukraine, bad equipment, no food or reinforcement, then committed suicide.

@@USS_Grey_Ghost , wet dreams, are you your mother?

Only it's none of that. The withdraw was planned and orderly and the Ukrainians took mass casualties from artillery. This is the muddy season. Russian has given Ukraine sloppy mud to sit in. As soon as it freezes they will be back & take it all back again.

Lol

I disagree, I have no idea what I'm talking about but I will definitely argue.

It was invented by Nestor Makhno. He was apparently the first one to have the idea to mount a machine gun on a horse drawn carriage. And thus the 'tachanka' wad born.

In the first minute I'm pulled out of the video by him mentioning the size of the advance was equal to the size of Delaware. Why would anyone who doesn't know Delaware know the size of it? So we all have to look it up in order to carry on with the video. He could have just said 5,100 km squared, roughly 50 km x 100 km, 30 miles by 60 miles. Ok so I continue, then he tries to use the cavalry charge, blitzkrieg, etc and put a new name when it called thunder. It's a rush attack. Why does he keep putting blocks in the way of just getting on with giving us the information? Perun explains it so clearly. And I'm just one irritated commenter. This guy might be excellent. But I'm saying what I think, just like he is.

@@Google_Does_Evil_Now this channel is a reliable source of garbage takes, cherry picked data, and poorly informed opinion. Just about every video of his I see on a wide range of subjects is always missing planet sized gaps in context, crucial information, and informed analysis. My guess is, he consumes his information from another source, and then rewrites the essay as to not make it obvious he copied the homework, but doesn’t actually understand the content enough to rehash it accurately in its new plagiarized form.

True, the Comanche used this tactic in establishing their empire the Camancheria, they swept aside the rival tribes of central Texas and the Southern Plains. The took the old tactic of simple raids and put it on steroids. Not a new concept just new tools.

@@Google_Does_Evil_Now maybe most of their viewers are American. Though I'll admit even I (an American) can't really picture the size of Delaware off the top of my head. Your example with km is a lot easier for me to visualize.

" (They hated each other)" many of the russian groups hate each other also, apparently most wagner hate the regular forces and the kadyrites stand over the regular russian forces and even act as blocking forces if they try and retreat. All unconfirmed though just what ive heard through the grape vine

@@AGMI9 I seen a video about three weeks ago of a Wagner mercenary getting his butt whipped by three regular Russian soldiers because the guy disrespected an officer. But, squabbles between regular troops, and mercenaries are common throughout history. That's a beef that will never die.

More like Shift+W

@@SuperRemion Ukraine decided to use its speed boost consumable

More Ukraine used intelligence to scout weak points in the Russian lines, drew away enemy forces with probing attacks and then yeah, they pressed W.

So Ukraine is winning right ?

Patton added a variation by using P-47s as armed scouts.

"Text box" ??🧐

@@adelarsen9776 So far, Ukraine is winning. As long as they keep hammering the weak outliers. Then they can concentrate on the armor that is pushing forward. Depends on if they allow that armor to keep moving forward while Ukraine pincer moves around the backside to cut off supply routes. Ukraine could TR from the rear, cutting the armor off. I simply do not know what the situation to the east of the push looks like. But, yes, Ukraine seems to have the upper hand. Russia is a paper tiger.

@@markmayfield2228 I'm not going to comment on what you said. I wish you good health.

very easy to explain - russian population is ready to defend homeland but doesnt want to die invading others

They lost all the secondary border wars the same way America lost Vietnam, North Korea, Afghanistan, South America because you cannot cause regime change where the majority of people hate you. No matter how long you fight. The only way to subjugate other people long term is to kill all their men and burn all their cities, like how the Mongols did to Russia in the 1200s.

Just like the US.

@@lesterquintrell4844 Nah, the U.S. loses due to the American public, while Russia loses due to the Russian command structure.

Never assume! Great lesson of the 21st century. US dominated the Iraq invasion because they did not assume... but then flagged a bunch when they thought they had won.

@@The1Elcil I was going to cite Roman legions but same sentiment.

to the best of my knowledge, the Vietnam gun trucks were built (improvised) to protect fuel convoys supplying inland helicopter bases.

Oh yeah, the Prussian war of 1870. That glorious humiliating defeat of France. Repeated 2 times over, causing every French soldier to always have some clean underpants ready in a pocket to attach to a stick and signal urgent need for communications.

Well it follows a similar premise, right? Have units that can lay hell run into enemy lines and begin blasting away key segments of enemy forces in order to cause general chaos and to cause said enemy to fold up.

@@DogeickBateman also the focus on bypassing the strong points and cleaning them up later. I guess it’s the natural progression. What the German storm troopers did in march 1918 lead to John monashes plan in July and august and September 1918. Then we all know the Rommel and gidarian thrusts into France. Guess it’s just modernising classic tactics. It’s basically having infantry fight and horseman go attack the encampment behind your foe in 1412

@@troystaunton254 The bypass part sounds strangely familiar to the Maoist concept of People's War, where he advocated for Red Army units to take smaller cities, and eventually expand to larger ones as progress continued. May I also mention that unlike the Russians, the Chinese actually had the system and the motivation to observe foreign tactics and adopt them to maximum effect.

Came here looking for someone to point this out.

Precisely. The Germans use of Bewegungskrieg together with combined forces, later coined Blitzkreig. That is why the Germans used motorcycles with machine guns mounted on side cars.

and he ultimately lost.

Thunder runs have been used throughout history and is nothing new, but still history has no shortage of morons to fall victim too it... and no one in history fell victim to it quite as expertly as the French did in ww2

@@brucesmith3740 Napoleon lost? Well, yeah, he wanted to see if his men were resistant to frostbite and starvation in Russia... they were not. Then Hitler said, "lets just check that one more time..., Oh the men are still not resistant to that, got it, ok i will just shoot myself now"

Yes, it was Napoleon who invented the cavalry charge. Nobody had thought of that before. Ever.

Breakthrough charges have been a thing for thousands of years, since people decided to run through or around the enemy instead of standing and fighting. We've just advanced from spears and horses to mechanised infantry

Blitzkrieg*

@Rob Bannstrom Seriously? wow...He's a soldier not an English major. Unlike folks like you who never served anyone but themselves.

Sean, I understood you but remember, this is the Internet and lots of foreigners and non-military folks watching these videos...

@Kermit Idiothunter Suggest you read a book called "The Ugly American", Kermie...

@Kermit Idiothunter No, it's a famous book about how Americans can be really obnoxious because they expect the world to speak not just English but to know all the nuances of American slang and culture. Conversely, (that means "just the opposite") it shines a spotlight on the arrogant inability of Americans to understand foreign cultures. It was made into a movie which isn't as good as the novel but it might be easier for you to digest as the book isn't written in large print with more pictures than text. The Ugly American is alive and well and it seems like I'm talking to one, right now...

I love Wargame!

@@drjmapple5510 same!

would have been even better with Bushmasters and Hawkeis

I knew I'd find a wargame player here haha

The same concept work with cavalry in civil war general. I ram through 3-4 cav brigades and sweep supplies and pin command ellements.

They should put Zelenskyy and Putin into the Thunder Dome. Two men enter, one man leaves. Nazi vs Soviet, who will win?

Repent to Jesus Christ “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” ‭‭John‬ ‭1‬:‭5‬ ‭NIV‬‬

The United States knew the "enemy". Let's not forget without our meddling, trillions of dollars of military eqiupment, training and support, the war would've been over in a few weeks and we would'nt be staring down the barrel of nuclear holocaust thanks to NATO, U.S. (Biden's Idioctic Administration), U.K., UN, and EU hatred of Putin.

@@cranberryeater7459 lol, we wish, Putin is a show pony with an immeasurable ego. No way he's leaving his desk

and rommels thunder run to cherbourg

And Ukraine is ideal terrain for fast armor tactics. The cities are spread out, separated by wide open fields. Only the rivers slow them down and Ukraine has been impressively effective in crossing those.

Ukraine is actually quite terrible for armor tactics during the mud season in Mar-May

@@PikaPilot Very true but it's not muddy now

the guy you're talking about was the Iraqi Info Minister and was dubbed "Baghdad Bob" and "Comical Ali" im sure there's some compilations on KZfaq if you search. He was funny because his English was particularly bad and would make oxymoronic gaffs like "they flew like rats" and "they're not anywhere they are everywhere moving" lol

@@bradchilders5546 I remember seeing Bagdad Bob on CNN talking in a box while they showed live footage of the air and ground attack. It was bizarre to see him saying they were driving away the aircraft conducting night time bombing missions while the CNN news crews were broadcasting live from the top of buildings.

We've had in in the playbook since the 1970s, it's a pleasure to see the Scorpions finally mincing the Russians up as they were designed to do.

Only a surface analysis though

All that combined.

These facts are not mutually exclusive.

As another user commented, the longer the delay between the frontline and command, the more effective this tactic is. The Russian army, as we have seen, is not designed to operate on its own initiative, but instead relies on officers to manage everything. If the officers are far away, then the thunder run has already moved on by the time any orders are received. It makes sense for both of these things to be true.

It basicly is modified with bigger risks bawegunskrieg(blitzkrieg) but it is politically incorrect to call it that because of... History. That's why its now called "thunder run"

First. Blitzkrieg is not a tactic it's a type of warfare that was achieved by the technological advancements of the 1900s. secondly "Thunder runs" are not how they are described in this video. A real thunder run isn't "Rush enemy Da Da Da" it is a multi stage attack with the intention of destroying enemy capability before said enemy has time to react then sweeping the enemy with weak spots where you can send in the army to wipe the floor with the rest of whatever's left example, dessert storm. Heck Ukraine isn't even using thunder runs a simplified version of what Ukraine is doing is basically, use long range artillery to bombard the position where you are invading, while doing bombarding prep intelligence and send army just behind the line of bombardment, get general understanding of what your fighting against, attack through weak spots and capture hard points.

@Ban this youtube no, the united states didn't even consider the METHOD OF WARFARE blitzkrieg (blitzkrieg is not a tactic wheraboo) because modern warfare is completely superior let me compare 2 very infamous and successful operations one using blitzkrieg (the blitzing of France) and one using modern warfare ( operation dessert storm). The blitzing of France was done by giving all resources to field commanders and the constant supply of resources. There were no specific targets in the blitzing of France and all of the attacks are continuous and general. The attacks consist of just attacking enemy resistance. Now operation dessert storm was done via several months of planning and pre-emptive sabotage, the targets were specifically selected in order to reduce enemy capability to zero while using minimal ammunition, supply, etc the majority was done via air force and communication while the actual land invasion waited until the air force was done

@@vangard9725 Agreed that this video fundamentally misunderstands the concept and misses the reality that Breakthroughs are fundamentally extremely high reward operations with relatively minimal risk if planned and executed properly. (And that almost always means an enemy with already stretched or poor C3). Conducting a breakthrough operation as the Russians attempted at Grozny (using well known Soviet MRB tactics) was a textbook example of not bothering to plan for an enemy fighting in their own territory and able to respond...well it's high risk....and it's fairly obvious Russia learned nothing from it as they continue to use the same failed tactics in the assault.

Yeah its similar, the difference with the blitzkrieg was the fastest and the most devastating tanks/vehicles all bust through the line together as one, penetrate as deep and quick as they can, so they can turn and overwhelm the weakest points from behind.

How about the 100 hr 7th Corps run from the Saudi Arabian Border to Safwan during Desert Storm.....right through multiple Iraqi Divisions.

I think it also looks suspiciously a lot like what Rommel did to the British on several occasions, which was to just fly at numerically and materially superior British forces and scare the absolute shit out of them. The British reacted badly because they were not prepared for such a hyperaggressive donkey run bearing down on them from what was supposed to be an enemy force so depleted that they would have little choice but maintain a static defense, ripe for being worn down by those superior British forces. Rommel knew, for his part, that squatting defensively was a guaranteed, if delayed, path to defeat so he did the only thing he had left in the kit bag: unexpected insanity. After the success of this unlikely and desperate strategy, Rommel joked that the British were running so hard, if he had the gas he could have chased them all the way back to Cairo. Of course without resupply or reinforcements from Germany it was all doomed to fail against a rapidly expanding and materially rich British force. But you can't deny that Rommel did the very best with what he had and at least temporarily snatched victory from the jaws of defeat. Under certain conditions war greatly favors the audacious.

Ever heard of blitzkrieg?

@@trekt9641 General Lee - fooled the union when very out numbered if I recall my history - battery of Battle of Chancellorsville

or Sherman's march to the sea