Yep, that was my experience in British army in 1970's. Most common purchase was a Bergen (rucksack) for comfort.

The whole story seems to be relating to some volunteers/cadets rather than Reservists and Regulars. There are a bunch of grass roots recruitment campaigns happening at oblast level started by Ramzan Kadyrov to provide 1000 men per oblast for a special volunteer army which is not funded at the federal level.

I'm the marine corps we had to pay for all of our own gear and boots and uniforms and such, I doubt this is different anywhere

As a former soldier in a NATO army it is true that we purchased our own gear - because much of the issue kit was junk. We bought as much civvy kit as our officers would let us get away with; boots, winter clothes, bivvy bags, field cooking stoves... you name it. Additionally many would buy out of pocket from CQ whatever top-end gear was temp issue or deployment-only issue. Shortages of equipment and lag behind incorporating civilian commercial technology is normal in all armies.

i disagree... i spent a thousand dollars on a customized alice pack ( or hog pack) , 300 on better lightweight boots ( like 4 different times) 400 on a more comfortable plate carrier, and countless other little pouches and shit to make life more comfortable..... And a lot of those pouches were actually old school stuff from the 70's and 80's found in surplus stores... A lot of the issued gear is complete shit or uncomfortable as hell. War is already very uncomfortable much of the time, I didnt want to die because of being tired or uncomfortable from dealing with sub par equipment. ( USA military, served in iraq and afghan)

And the US Minecrafted Patton and later Adm Forest to name a few;)

@@Br1cht no proof of pattons death being an assasination just a stupid claim thought of decades after it happened

@@Br1cht or the Germans with Rommel

@@Br1cht Patton was a trashbag Nazi sympathizer. Real war heroes became Presidents in the U.S. Look at U.S. Grant or Ike, as two examples.

This is 100% spot on.

Russian troops who destroy equipment without *explicit* orders to do so risk being accused of sabotage.

A lot of what they left behind was 30 to 40 years old. I hope the Ukrainians have a lot of good mechanics / restorers.

@@johnneill990 we do ;) BTW many abandoned vehicles have mines but this doesn’t work.

@@johnneill990 Tanks to the "tractor troops" Ukraine is able to bring these puppies out into workshops and never ran out of fresh tanks 🙂

In addition to your two points, the destruction of equipment is the act of a retreating force. Everyone knows that the Russians didn't retreat. They deliberately redeployed, following a well-planned timetable. Just ask Igor Konashenkov(!)

Anyway. The European space does not reflect the essence of the situation in Russia, the Western media often confuse the army of Russia and the army of its allies who live on humanitarian aid from Russia and think that Russia has everything very bad, in fact, all are given everything, everyone has enough of everything in abundance. The Russian military doesn't even take money with them to Ukraine because they are provided with everything. There are, of course, individual cases, but it depends on the commanders. Well, of course in Russia there are panicked people who take everything they can, from money to headache pills :D

@@J3sseReidSucser This may be the case for their professional army, but it's abundantly clear that many of the recently conscripted blokes where flat out told that the army was out of sleeping bags and mats, so if they wanted to sleep they had to buy their own. The combat nurse who brought them the news in the video I happened so see informed them that they would be issued with a uniform, helmet, weapon and boots. Everything else was at their own expense.

@@andersjjensen It's entirely possible that this could happen, but everyone I talk to from Russia says the only thing they really don't give is a butt pad

@@J3sseReidSucser lol units drafted "trained and equiped" by the Russian army and transported through Russia in Russian military veichles to go fight alongside Russian regular conscripts in a war that Russia started are part of the Russian army regardless of whatever little third world Soviet republic they where drug kicking and screaming from, and Russian conscripts are paid almost nothing officers regularly and openly sell issued equipment and supplies on the black market to supplement the poor income, and what little hasn't been sold to anti russian terrorist groups or western collectors is often poorly maintained, the Russian army is a joke at best the writing was on the wall since the Soviet Afghan war

That's overall very similar to what my friends and acquaintances who served recently did - GI gear covered all the REQUIREMENTS, personal purchases were about comfort and upgrades - everything from better underwear to a better sidearm, but not from danger of LACKING a capability.

Ukrainian troops are rotating to the front for 48 or 72 hours at a time the same cannot be said for the Russian troops.

An interesting point regarding morale comes out of a couple of articles I have read post-mobilization callup by Putin. The phrase "cannon fodder" has been used by men who want to avoid the callup, giving you an idea of how the failures in Ukraine are being perceived by those Russians who thought they would not end up personally involved in the war. If your reservists and conscripts already think they are simply being sent out solely to die fruitlessly, that is going to be sheer hell on unit morale, cohesion, and operation. History has shown that units with such an abysmal condition are much more likely to break when engaged.

yeah, about first, I originally had a "why we fight" part, but it is indirectly covered in the quote about the diversity of Russian troops, particularly the aspect that separatists don't want to fight outside. About second, I left the political level out of the picture, should have mentioned that explicitly.

Russia did not plan for anything lasting beyond days. The Washington Post has a very impressive long-form article on the lead up to the war, specifically the role of the FSB and how badly it screwed up. FSB leaders for Russia's Ukraine operation had plans to immediately move to Kiev, they were so confident of an immediate victory. It was a huge miscalculation.

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized Wars can not be separated from politics.

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized van Clausewitz is a bit dissapointed in you now :)

The US and Russia both thought it likely that Ukrainians would not be motivated to put up a real fight. The US had trained the Ukrainian army to some extent but think Afghanistan, they had trained the army there too and it evaporated. As it became clearer and clearer that Ukrainians really backed their government in resisting Russia, and that they were using what they had in smart ways, then the US and the rest of the West dropped any idea of 'sitting it out'. Then Putin's goose was cooked, though it took many months of Western aid and a long, painful Ukrainian fighting retreat to make that fully visible to us all.

yup

100%. There's a huge difference between "I want this really cool accessory for my gun, I'm gonna buy it" and "you have to purchase your own helmets, body armor, uniforms, shoes, sleeping bags, tents, and virtually everything else except for a rifle" (which will quite probably be in terrible condition)

Let me put it to you this way. The average US Private has to be educated on how not to blow all his money because, if he lives in the barracks, he has free food, free housing, and free equipment as long as he keeps it from getting lost or wrecked. When I was in Afghanistan and Iraq, there were car dealerships set up for the guys who were drawing pay with nowhere to spend it. Buy the car in the combat zone tax free and it was delivered to your home when you returned to the states. Soldiers were paying for these brand new cars in cash because who needs to save money right? There were also bazaars where one could purchase televisions, high-quality mattresses, and gaming consoles to make your rack a bit more like home. Add in the additional food areas that you could pay for, the MWR areas with recreation such as pool and movies, and hot showers (hot water isn't much of a challenge in a 130 degree desert) and life wasn't that bad when you weren't getting shot at. But this motivates a US Soldier (generally there's always exceptions) to be a well-trained, educated, and free-thinking individual compared to your average conscript who is treated like a junkyard dog on the expectation that it will make them "tougher".

When friends of mine deployed to Afghanistan years ago they talked about how the Army gave them money to upgrade their kit. I’ve no idea if that’s true or not but I doubt the Russian army is shelling out extra rubles for sliders going on deployment.

You're right that many Russian soldiers are dirt poor; that's a big reason why they're just common criminals stealing everything including toilets! But tampons are very good for plugging bullets wounds. I think even many US soldiers have them.

Thank you!

So suggestuve and also funny in places.

This is what you get when a dictator with expertise only in suppressing internal dissent and promoting propaganda is in charge of a major offensive military operation.

Perhaps look at NK, but benefitted is questionable.

ussr benefited from prolonged warfare,aslo the quote is innacurate.

Not to mention there's more accurate context here than most news broadcasters can stomach. Even DW and BBC are full of basic errors. I saw a UATV report that identified a swedish AT-4 as Russian RPG 26. These journalists must be on speed, with the number of stupid mistakes they make.

Rumble wont censor him for saying Nahtzee. Alphabet is evil.

MHV uses no methodology to rule-out his biases, and therefore states only his biases. Correct? So, how much were you paid to advertise the nonsence you posted?

@@SwitchTF2 Ukraine was killing Russian Speaking Ukrainians in all the border towns. Russia put an end to that. They moved in unchallenged held every inch of the territory they took... They then moved Ukrainians from a few areas and withdrew some areas. Ukraine was completely nullified in every aspect. Now the pathetic western media says Ukraine is winning when Russia has simply withdrawn from unimportant and worthless land. The Border has been annexed and their isn't anything Ukraine can do about it.

@@HegelsOwl Can you name a few biases and explain this? I'm probably wasting my time, but since you can spell, maybe you can think too.

Arabs only fight well if driven by religious fervor. Arab nationalism is non existent.

When The Russians start even coming close to resembling ANYTHING like THAT; they've got cataclysmic problems... Hell the Iraqi Republican Guard in the 1991 Gulf War seems to be more competent than most Russian Formations in Ukraine and they lost Half their Force in that WAR...

The Russian military is the one that trained the arabs.

its a really bad essay tho. but MHV takedown would be entertaining

@@cnlbenmc trust me while RU has its problems the Iraq never even approached the Ukraine or Russia in military prowess. if you think Russia does poorly you havent read on how Iraq performed, it would make Soviet Winter War blush

I believe he's Austrian though.

Achtung, baby!

@@TheTomasio1975 You know who else was Austrian?

Germans said the Nazis were winning last time too.

@@SirAntoniousBlock Mozart?? Sigmund Freud?? Arnold Schwarzenegger?? 😉🙃

russian ppl have no money to buy military equipment. Even here, in Ukraine, you have to save up, in order to buy a Glock. Thus, buying bodyarmor, CADs, and other stuff, means you have to take a loan from a bank, and there are actually advertisements on ''mobilization loans''. Basically its: ''U see, Ivan, you die or go in debt for lifetime, but most likely both, good luck, pray to putin''

Glad you like them!

It's just conjecture. I find it amusing that you though you admit via your appreciation you know nothing yourself, you feel qualified to label the video detailed and careful. For all you know, it's end to end bullshit. You are simply reacting to the cartoon grade entertainment graphics and stylish accent of the speaker.

@@johnsmith1474 He cites his sources John Smith. His "conjecture" is directly trace-able. Like any good journalist Bernhard, invests a lot of time on his subjects. Go through his series of videos. He confers with museum curators, armor and military experts, and many other educated professionals. Once you've got an idea of the body of his work, then I don't think you'll claim he's "talking out his ass".

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized hi 😅

@@johnsmith1474 You speak very loudly for someone who doesn't seem to know the high quality reports Military History Visualized produces consistently. Try watching more of their content before wading in with both guns blazing.

Yes, look at poor Brusilov. He led a successful campaign but his counterpart delayed and then did not use new tactics he employed.

Like Stalin with Zhukov

It should be noted that following those battles, Russia still took another 3 years to break. They learned a lot in that time too. Never count them out entirely.

If you live in a society like Russia you learn to fear and mistrust everyone, especially authority figures.

the only part about this battle that will be like world war two for the Russians?... Yes, millions of Russians will die. But their goals will never be met. как сказать неудача по-русски? Зачем умирать за лилипута Путина, когда есть ради чего жить? при отправке на фронт? массово сдаться и дожить до повешения Путина? kak skazat' neudacha po-russki? Zachem umirat' za liliputa Putina, kogda yest' radi chego zhit'? pri otpravke na front? massovo sdat'sya i dozhit' do povesheniya Putina?

Of course, "Anti-Radiation Missiles ...", just a typo.

Kids Bullshit. Game changer was well trained boots on the ground. As ever since WW1

@@rafaelgoncalvesdias7459 No substitute for training. Good equipment is also essential.

@@rafaelgoncalvesdias7459 New tactics aren't "kid's bullshit". That kind of thinking is part of why Russia is losing a war they should have won easily. That and being horribly corrupt.

Why do some Russian military equipment look old and rusty? What’s the training like compared to western armies counterparts?

@@therealbosstopob4l974 The problem with Russian army is complete indifference to the equipment and/or just basic lack of it. Corruption is widespread and deeply rooted in the system, which makes it almost impossible to acquire new equipment. Only those divisions which are created for "show" get it (AK-12, Armata T-14 tanks e.t.c), in reality all the new tanks and weapons are just nowhere to be found. In our division we had 4 tanks: 3 T-72B3M, and 1 T-64. When they were being prepared for relocation, T-64 didn't start up, one T-72 didn't as well, and other two barely made it to the border having a lot of engine problems. Out of 8 BTRs only 4 started up and went to Ukraine. When it comes to training, we have none. Those who serve by law (we have conscription law, where if you are from 18 to 27 you have to serve 1 year, except if you go to university's military courses and become an officer) usually just clean the barracks, as well as the territory of their base. Maybe 1-2 times in their year of service they go to the shooting range, and once a week they have morning training. At other times we were just sleeping, browsing internet and being depressed that our girlfriends probably cheat on us while we do that useless shit (cause you can't go home, maybe once, twice a year, or you can go every weekend, if you have money. You know what I mean) Those who serve by contract have a bit more training, but it's up to them. As they are privileged, they can just do nothing all day, and no one will say anything to them. Or they can actually go to shooting ranges, workout and keep their body in shape, but I've seen maybe 10-15 of them doing actual military things, but also I've seen hundreds doing jackshit. Whenever you see these military competitions, where Russian and US soldiers do boxing, or wrestling, or compete in any other sports, Russia usually send guys who were previously trained, e.g guys who were professional boxers as civilians, and learned nothing new while in the military, while Navy SEALs actually learn how to fight and shoot while serving. So overall I would say average quality of soldiers is way higher in western armies. We Russians excel in one thing - Defence. We don't have any attacking capabilities when we are unmotivated and have nothing to fight for (like now. This war is useless), however, as we've seen many times in history, when Russia gets boxed and attacked, for whatever reason, be it genetic memory, our roots, or just sheer anger and unwillingness to die (or all together) people start fighting like cornered animals, even with no guns, even with no armored vehicles or tanks, and honestly, any army in the world, even US, will have absolutely horrible time inside our borders, cause there will be so many guerillas. Any man, woman or child would be a potential threat, not to mention, that anybody who will be able to hold a gun, will sign in to fight. Think of it as a national spirit. And also winter... the deeper you go into Russia, the colder it will get, and trust me, at some point even Abrams will just stop working cause oil will freeze.

@@Slavalanche Hi mate, before the war I heard Ukrainian army was as corrupt. Their weapons weren't any better initially. What's your take?

Even in medieval times your baron would arm and armour you if you were to join his army. This is more like ancient times when each levied citizen brought his own family hoplon and linothorax if he could afford one.

True, a famous American president once said " the buck stops everywhere" and "no, I don't take any responsibility".

Bs. Nothing to do with fascism or its principles.

what? the fallout for failure is the same in western countries as in russia, by which I mean ZERO. in fact in russia probably more than in the us, because us leaders never get blowback from their failures. was anyone punished for Iraq, Afghanistan or Lybia? Nah they all kept their positions. this is just reaching, and badly informed at that

@@phunkracy As if, a core element of a liberal democracy is an increased responsiveness on the government's part to popular pressure and regular transitions of power to shake up the deadwood. Any leader that stays in power too long eventually becomes detrimental as they lose their grip. The buck stops here is a famous saying, but the principle of collective Cabinet responsibility is a similar tenet in parliamentary democracies. That acceptance that failures by subordinates reflect on the whole government, and the need to appease the people, is what makes democracies better places to live - Chile suffers from frequent earthquakes for instance. They had a particularly bad one in the mid 20th century and greatly reformed their system to keep people safe. Under Pinochet the building laws stagnated, but a flurry of new legislation came out during the 1990s, and when a quake occurred, larger than the devastating one decades prior, casualties were tiny, something like 18 iirc. Meanwhile thousands died in Iran from an earthquake in the 1970s and thousands were still dying from them in the 2000s.

Nah, Putin is already blaming everything at the West. Russian economic problem? The West. Russian retreat in Ukraine? The West. Russian military problem? The West.

Mobile crematoriums were overloaded

YES! That suddenly hit me watching this. Thank Dog! It means, historically, that d'bad guys will eventually lose

Thing is, German High command wasn't exactly competent by any standards, they were just as politicised as Stalin's army. The only reason they managed to get so far is because they were fighting against nations that hadn't fully embraced combined arms - the Polish army lacked numerical superiority in the air and on the ground, and the French were so convinced of the Maginot's invincibility that they ignored any chance that Germany could go through Belgium again. When it came to the invasion of the USSR, the generals proposed an overly ambitious plan that satisfied their mythos of invincibility rather than any sound military theory. Franz Halder literally ignored strategic goals needed to continue the German war effort, such as the Caucasuses and instead focused on the flashy goals like Moscow that would please Hitler and his own ego

I think Putin 100% believed that Zelenskiy would run if he made a move towards the capital. Believing some FSB profile. It’s him and the FSB who messed up from the start.

@@johnroach9026 There are a couple things here that I think you don't quite have correct, so if I may. 1. It's been a while since I've been heavily involved in WW2 history, but to my knowledge, it wasn't necessarily the French being so convinced of the Maginot's plan they forgot about Belgium. Rather, everyone knew the most likely place for a German attack would be Belgium, after all, no idiot would attack head-first into the most heavily fortified defense-in-depth series fortifications (and even if they did, the French would have plenty of time to react); therefore, France prepared to counterattack the expected Belgium offensive. They knew the Ardennes weren't covered very well, but it was heavily forested and narrow, so they expected that should any German forces attempt to attack, they'd either be extremely bogged down, or at the very least, slowed down enough to give France plenty of time to attack. And if the Germans did anything as suicidal as attacking the Maginot head on, then the French High Command could go to bed happy. However, as we all know, this didn't happen. The Germans managed to go through the Ardennes dramatically faster than expected and encircled the French forces counterattacking into Belgium. This was the brainchild of Erich von Manstein, who proposed that the German plan not target going through Belgium, but target the expected counterattack as its main goal. In essence, to use an analogy, France is defending a house against an invader and has to cover the back and front. They barricaded the back steel door with heavy sandbags and has a Berthier rifle aimed at the weaker wooden front door. There is a tiny unbarricaded window, barely enough to fit someone (supposedly) in the back of the house, but France wagers that if someone tries to go through it, they'd either get stuck or take so long and make so much noise that France would notice and could take their time countering them. What actually happened was that Germany's brother knocked on the front door, France got its attention turned there as it expected, and then Germany showed off its Olympic gymnast skills and leapt through the back window and had a gun pressed up against France's head before France could react. 2. As for Moscow being the target, I suggest you search up the Soviet Union's major rail lines in 1939. I have a feeling you'll immediately notice why Moscow might've been an attractive target. Of course, a large part of the motivation for taking Moscow likely would've been political, but the majority of the major railroads in the Soviet Union went through Moscow. If the Soviet Union lost Moscow, logistics would become dramatically more difficult. Not to mention that taking Moscow would have denied the Soviets of a large amount of industry and infrastructure they had built up in Moscow. Of course, as you know, the Germans split their forces, and unfortunately for the Germans, Italians, and various allies, and rather fortunately for much of the rest of the world, they found it difficult to continue to execute the war to a victorious conclusion. 3. I would agree with your assessment that the German military was politicized, especially in the second half of WW2, but I wouldn't say it was anywhere near as bad as the Soviet militarily. The Germans did not conduct a Great Purge for one and I believe it wasn't uncommon for senior military generals to stand up to Hitler, especially in the first half of WW2. The German military I'd say had some very positive military traditions (effective initiative distribution at all levels, positive recruit policies, maneuver warfare primacy, combined arms, officer corps professionalism, and an expectations for senior officers to subject themselves to the harshness the soldiers endured) that served them well in the first half of the war, but which lost some of its lustre after several years of rough wars depleting quality from the rank-and-file. Coupled that with increasing political meddling (a reminder that some of Germany's most visionary and effective military leaders were sacked by Hitler for disagreeing with him either militarily or politically) and increasingly disorganized and incoherent upper echelons of command and I think you could say Germany's military command was rather lacklustre by the later stages of the war, which perhaps you agree with. Though, excepting the death throes of the regime, even when it was particularly bad and with Hitler sacking some of his top commanders, I still wouldn't say the politicization was as bad as the Sovet Unions' politicization of the officer corps; though, I agree that it definitely got pretty bad by the end. Again, for as bad as it got, especially after the attempted coup, it wasn't the Great Purge. I'd say it was more it buckling under the combined stress of 6 years of total war fighting outnumbered constantly under bombardment with numerous structural issues extant since the early days of the war finally revealing its severity when put under pressure. Though, perhaps one could argue that the Soviet command had gotten less politicized by the end of the war. I'd still say the German military command was a leading example of how to build an effective military in the first half of the war minus all of the more unpleasant, potentially internationally illegal stuff. But as I was saying, the second half, maybe not so much. Still offers many lessons. . . on things that may be best avoided. My apologies that point 3 is somewhat less organized. I didn't have as clear of a structure when writing it and don't have the time to edit it. I hope it is still coherent enough, unlike the German high command near the end of the war. If something I said is wrong, please do let me know. It's been a while and some things (like knowledge of the USSR's military structure) aren't areas where I'm necessarily the most versed in.

.

What a horror! We urgently need to send you the Minister of Defense Shoigu. Then your tankers will even have to buy tanks at their own expense. Shoigu will teach American generals how to steal money from the budget! Your soldiers will finally engage in proper military training. They will build houses for the generals.

@@user-xr4wu4rp2r "Your soldiers will finally engage in proper military training. They will build houses for the generals." We had that in Sweden up until the 1990's, where employed staff at various levels could use the state resources for personal use. For instance, if the helicopter squadron was scheduled for training with hanging cargo, it could be tasked to deliver building material to the summer house instead of flying a cement block back and forth over the airfield; or have the mechanics under training service the private car when there was little else to do.

@@johanmetreus1268 Things are much worse with us. I think only mass public executions of generals will help.

@@dxpsumma383...No, it wasn't, which is exactly why I commented. He said US forces also had to buy their gear like Russia ("in some cases"), and that's not true. All the required gear, or kit, is provided to you. You have the choice to buy additional gear, or pieces of your own gear (if it's approved). Some things you _are_ required to pay for. I'm not sure how it is in other branches, but in the Marine Corps., for example, you pay for your dress blues, and they cost a couple thousand dollars. They were about $2,800 back in 2001. This isn't part of your kit, though. If you're gonna troll, at least don't suck at it.

What exactly is a TA-50?

@@baneofbanes It's been a while, but Tables of Allowance is what the TA stands for I think. TA-50 is the basic issue you receive based upon the unit to which you are posted. I was in the 82nd Airborne back in the late 80's early 90's. You received the Kevlar ballistic helmet with parachutist shock pad and retention straps; hook/pile tape lowering line and "H" harness; large rucksack with frame; Waterproof bags (2); 2 one quart canteens and one 2 quart canteen, LBE (load bearing equipment) with 2 mag pouches, canteen holders for the canteens; poncho and poncho liner; shelter half and tent pegs/poles; sleeping bag and sleeping mat; wet weather jacket and pants; over boots (galoshes) and Chemical Protective (MOPP suit) and gas mask; last but not least duffle bag.

so, kharkiv is pronounced as hard-kiv ?

@@PrograError I think drop the d, so har-kiv?

@@gwtpictgwtpict4214 It is indeed Harkiv. And Herson.

there are 2 generals in charge of 2 parts of the frontline in russian army northern part is commanded by a lesser general but it is more prioritized southern part is under a higher general but has less priority. So, uor glorious military hits both sides so those generals constantly fight for supplies and men to be delivered to them. Thus, russia has to either completely lose one front, or juggle the supplies and lose both north and south.

It won't matter if they had a counterpart at this point. Their professional units took a lot of hammering and I doubt that the newly mobilized troops have the knowledge to carry out a coordinated assault.

Thank you, unlikely, I wanted to cover the mobilization, but was a bit late for that.

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized oh sorry, i think i was to ambigous. I was asking about mobilisation as a concept. And maybe the evolution of it.

Unlikely, years ago I wanted to cover various "basics", but I ditched that idea a while ago for several reasons.

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized it nit too late as lots did video before lots of facts were known and a sober video on mobilisation would be interesting

@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized Slightly ironic, that…😉

Mein Furher....Steiner...

It workt, Ukrainens Steiner did somthing. how long the can hold there gains is a diverent question

Arty only

@@Valks-22 lol with garbage equipment and N. Korean supplied arty shells. Truly fucked.

Yeah, we (late Cold War) always had our "Gucci" gear we purchased, but we could have done quite well with nothing but government issue. I mean, I might *prefer* my personally procured stuff, but the USGI stuff wasn't *bad*. In fact, most of my personally purchased stuff was stuff that was in the supply system - I just wanted to make sure I always had *mine* (for example, I preferred the older style H-yoke suspenders on my web gear and the older canvas buttpack in lieu of the then current issue Y-yoke suspenders and nylon buttpack... and the H-yoke meant i could carry *two* buttpacks so I could Lillie out of my web gear without a rucksack for about a week in temperate or hot weather. Super nice for a light infantryman...)

Months?... I can't see Russia hold on for two weeks. By November Ukraine may already have most of Luhansk oblast at this rate.

@@afdkj 4 weeks (not even a month like looking) have passed since the beginning of the Kharkiv offensive (September 6 and he writes a comment on October 4) and the Russian lines were broken again

Why is it obsolete? He stated that he didn't include the most recent events and the structural factors do not change.

@@untruelie2640 true. It’s still astonishing how fast things in the ground are changing.

@@andrewtaylor940 the russians waited far too long on mobilization, when ukraine mobilized from day 1. they got far too cocky thinking even with severe losses they can stand up to fully mobilized Ukraine

I feel sorry for the people who maintain the DeepStateMAP. The poor chaps had to make four updates in a single day. I don't think that's ever happened before.

thats not sad that is good news

And with the formal annexation of the four Ukrainian territories, Russian conscripts can openly be deployed there.

The problem though is that if Russia hasn't officially declared war in Ukraine, there is no Russian law that supports a general mobilization that sends troops to another country. Those new conscripts would limited to serving only within Russian borders legally and that's already not happening.

@@tonysu8860 that's certainly true in light of the Russian law, but - and not to be cynical here, do we really believe law carries any meaning in Russia? I conscripted men were indeed sent to Ukraine, who would protest? Who would take responsibility for it?

@@frost3840 not following the laws of conscription and mobilisation (invalids, over-aged and so forth dragged into service) caused a high profile statement on Russian state television, demanding the situation to be rectified and the responsible for these abuses suffer the appropriate consequences.

@@johanmetreus1268 I haven't heard of that in truth, but can that change anything? Several city counselors have petitioned for Putin to resign, without any luck. Maybe I'm talking out of my ass here, but I think as long as they cover it up with a good lie, they can do whatever they want

Of course Russia doesn't fear NATO ground forces why would it? NATO missiles within 10 minutes of moscow is why Russians don't want NATO an inch eastward, a promise that's been consistently broken and caused the war in georgia and in Ukraine, since 2014 and since February.

Given that you don't even know what the word "proves" means, I don't think you should think so highly of your own analysis.

I agree. The sober truth is that the western alliance has no possibility of an end to the war on their terms unless Putin either negotiates or dies (and is replaced by a party willing to negotiate). If Allied forces enter Russia proper, NBC weaponry will be used on them so that's out. And right now, it's clear enough that he's not going to negotiate. Their call- up of reservists and their large- scale movement of men and material west makes it clear that he's intent on resolving this militarily. It's not hard to see why, since this war of attrition favors the Russians greatly. Best case scenario for the west is that they regain all of the lost Ukrainian territory- and then wait for a large- scale Russian offensive sometime in the first half of next year. It will be interesting to see how the west responds to it.

Now, just as you said, Poland's territory is incredibly boring: sea to the North, Mountains to the South, and great plains all the way in between, with just one major water feature, the Wistula river, running roughly South to North halfway between eastern and western border. However, this is FAR to perfect a picture. You see, Poland has a very unique feature. While our "bodies of water" are NOT impressive, roughly every 5 miles, there is a "body of water" that is either deeper than 5 feet, or broader than 65. You are already feeling the drift eh? Yup. That means you can't ford it directly because of the depth, or the JABS isn't long enough to get you across. Meaning, your army will be navigating a veritable maze needing to stop every few miles for fording/bridging, or look for local bridges, which may be blown up already or simply nowhere good enough. In fact, quite a few have a limit of... 10 tons. No, not even your wheeled APC will take that, and forget the Abrams. Hence, so many outdated BMP-1s and obsession with new, amphibious IFV, the Borsuk (Badger). Decent armor means it has to be barn-sized to float :) And BMP's, despite all the outdated-ness, have one virtue: they are tracked, and cheap. They can cross tough terrain and, at least in theory, float. Yeah we know it's not really true.

And another correction. Patriot? Yes, we're getting two batteries, each with two firing units. But that's the current delivery. There are 6 more outstanding batteries on order, but with delivery dates to be yet negotiated. In the meantime, we're getting 2 batteries of Narew system, which is essentially Britain's Sky Sabre with the CAMM missile and the local fire control system and radar. One is in pre-delivery checks, and the other will arrive next year, with ...21 more batteries to follow under framework agreement. As for the air force, your take is correct - 3 squadrons of F16 Block 52, and 3 squadrons of modified soviet platforms. However, this will also change soon: in 2024, we're slated to take first deliveries of F35s, coming from LRIP batch 16, because we've ordered Block 4 machines for 2 squadrons. Also on the way, with the first 12 landing next year, are 48 FA-50 Golden Eagle LCAs, enough to form/rearm 3 squadrons. And Navy... uh. No, let's skip that... HOWEVER, we have some "things that float". Like 2x Perry class "museum" frigates. What counts though, is that we have full 2 batteries of NSM (Naval Strike Missile). Coastal ASM missile "artillery". Considering their range... well, we might not have much of a fleet, but we can sure blow out of the water any enemy fleet that gets too cocky in our part of the Baltic pond.

Yes, this makes sense.

And sympathy for Ukraine, getting stronger with every new frontline orc conscript.

*Not defections but directions

The world is appalled at the death of young Russians in this as well.

I heard before invasion, Russian military sold fuel to Belarus.

Do not worry my friend, USA lost a war with a bunch of goat farmers and rice farmers before that. That's after 20 years of bombing them into dust. Those countries had primitive tech and no economy to speak of and US forces still fled with tail between legs, leaving millions or even billions of dollars worth of hardware behind for the enemy. Now, Ukraine are no goat farmers, they are a MODERN EUROPEAN COUNTRY with what was the largest active military in Europe, entrenched, dug in, well trained and well equipped (even better now with western help). They're fighting on their own turf and have been ready for this war for over a decade, morale is high among the troops since they're defending their land. They've had plenty of time to prepare efficient tactics. I think the only reason that Russia managed to succeed to take all that territory is because of the "Kiyv feint", which diverted Ukraine forces to the capital, allowing Russian forces in the South and East to take and hold effectively. However, attrition is making that difficult now. Ukraine tactic now is to direct overwhelming numbers against small, isolated targets. Bit by bit, they'll continue unless Russian leadership thinks of a viable counter-tactic. Modern super power states have no chance at successful invasions with modern warfare doctrine, that includes Russia and the US. I think the days of invasions are pretty much over. Do you know how Germans managed to take and hold large swathes of land? They slaughtered the populace and mass executed military leadership. Warsaw uprising? No problem, eradicate the population. Those tactics won't fly today, too many cameras about.

@@mattaddison1910 and they are still goat herders and bombing themselves into dust

Love that guy’s channel, the fact he provides sources like MHV does makes them 10000x better than most of the commentators on KZfaq.

@@thunderbug8640 Though Perun does loooooong videos.

@@djd8305 That he does lol. Not padded though which is the important thing.

@@djd8305 , most channel viewer tend to think they are too short lol

Glad you enjoyed it.

Exactly,.... from the west,....

@@ernestocienfuegos6800 OK clever clogs how does the east explain how the Russians advance slower than your toenails?

"pretty much sums up what the situation appears to be from the West" Exactly. Using only western sources for a video is using only ones sides propaganda, no balance here, no vetting of information, no real analysis. This is such a bad take that it made me unsub. It will be many years after this war ends that we'll know what really happened and the real statistics, but for this kind on analysis I'll just tune-in to any mainstream western news channel.

"from the West" hmmm I wonder if that's a problem . . .

I am very aware that war is chaos, I don't really understand if you mean "reenactments" in the sense of reenactments as activity of "replaying war". I actually have experience in those and there is an interview with a combat veteran at the end of this video that also pretty much states that war is chaos. With timestamp of that interview part: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/fayEZMeCq9-1dpc.html

​ @Military History Visualized I watched that cast, essentially What I am driving at is that mentally one conceptualizes and theorizes What the experience will be, each time it is different. in reality. Incidentally amphibious landings are one of the most difficult tactical operations undertaken. That is why specialized training is conducted. The greatest challenge is to bridge the gap between academic study and practical experience. Your podcast is better than most because you search the archives and see what the people experiencing .the reality wrote at the time. For instance one of the cast you did contained a defensive layout of German positions. Lacking experience the positions would look confusing and have no apparent organized meaning. But to a soldier who understands the weapons and people. Just looking at it one could tell it was from a real Skizzie. That the unit was experienced and knew their weapons and they knew the likely enemy approaches. Learning the skill to perceive these things takes time and experience. Your advantage is that you can word smith the concepts and theories down to short concise knowledge quantities. After all of life my thinking takes me to the theory that we should gain as much knowledge of potential enemies and convert them to friends before we end up destroying each other. Experience is the feed back loop that corrects all of our misconceptions.

That's not the type of sabotage that's going to stop a vehicle from being redeployed and it's obvious. What needs to be done, is throwing a grenade into the engine bay at the very least.

For tanks and armored vehicles, Russia is Ukraines largest arms supplier. Many are totaled on the battlefield but salvaged for any useful parts and returned with damaged vehicles to rear-area repair facilities. Many are just out of fuel and abandoned on the road leading back to the Motherland and are painted, the radio present changed and they are ready for battle.

Many of them are intact though and are quickly reused by the Ukrainians. For example the captured T-90M looked brand new on the inside. It even had the latest targeting system installed. This really goes to show that Russian troops have very low morale and got completely routed during the Kharkiv offensive.

@@JR-ut2ne You don't care about the equipment if your army doesn't care about you.

@@rodwallace6237 while funny meme, it's closer to.. 5th largest arms supplier.

And there are also accounts of conscripts who show up with their own equipment, have it confiscated for "redistribution."

I'm not Russian nor do I support their position but the very idea of internal thieves selling off desperately needed military material makes my blood boils.

@@marlarki5280 Wars are not fought by armies but by societies so the Russian army will reflect their society, backward repressive inefficient and thoroughly corrupt and rotten to the core.

But that's still a deliberate (and ussually good) decision. If you need a bayonet, lots of things have already gone terribly wrong. That's different from the Russians simply not having them available at all. Now if they had told you "Ammo is limited for ourselves and opfor, there will be a lot of fighting at close range with bayonets and knives.....but we're not actually going to issue you any since we don't have them in stock", that would've meant the shit has hit the fan to Russian levels. My training was badly abreviated. When I signed everybody who did what I do was one or approaching mandatory deployment cooldown. Hand to hand combat went "You know anything about fighting? Oh, you've done competitive kickboxing and Krav Maga? You're a pass, go report for more classes on things that do matter." And second time I brought my own boots. The support the Meindl offered was too stiff while the sole was too weak while standing on things other than sand or flat surfaces. Cost a pretty penny to not just buy them, but have a shoemaker paint and coat them in a way that they looked to be issue. Does this mean Meindl sucks and shouldn't be issued? No, it means I fractured my foot in the semi-finals for a kickboxing tournament and have had trouble walking long distances in weaker shoes since then. Getting replacement boots 1st time also took a month. Why? I've size 46 while most men have 41-44. They simply didn't bring any spares for that one guy and finding them at home once requested took a while. Shitty situation for me, definately. But bad logistics and procurement decision? No, pretty good actually.

sounds like Generation Kill's characters and how they were kit up...

@@PrograError That was no mistake. They knew as long as cpl Person has enough rip fuel, Iraq would fall one way or another. 😉

thanks

Plus he wanted to show brotherhood to Chinese Olympic propaganda.