A weird way to say that Russia is currently winning a proxy war against all of NATO as the article I linked clearly explains. I guess if you had any reading comprehension you wouldn’t be making these imbecilic comments in the first place though.
Doesn’t sound like you have much respect or hope for Ukraine. It had one of the strongest militaries in the world and has been supported by the world’s most militarily advanced countries before and during the war. It’s not like, let’s say, a war against farmers armed with AKs living in rural communities in a desert, the mountains, or a jungle – you know, the kinds of enemies NATO/allies take 20 years to lose against.
Alright, so not so much small as smaller than Russia. Of course that means there are only 10 or so nations that aren’t small. How absurd it is then for NATO to be losing to tiny Russia…
Ukraine isn’t a part of NATO, lol. If they were, the USA would be on Russia Shores from the Pacific, and Russia would be invaded by the other 5 NATO members who share a border with them at a minimum, potentially including Turkiye from across the Sea who alone have a top 10 standing for military and they have already backed Ukraine’s membership approval.
I’m talking about the article. The United Kingdom isn’t Ukraine, and yet they’re talking about how they, the rest of NATO and Ukraine are losing to Russia at arms production.
Though the lessons translate to a hot war too. If you don’t have bombs to lob, you have to stop lobbing bombs.
The only people who are delusional are the ones who don’t understand how powerful Russian army has become over the past two years. Maybe educate yourself by reading what people with a clue have to say on the subject https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/attritional-art-war-lessons-russian-war-ukraine
They can’t even win against a small nation like Ukraine after a drawn out 2 year long war.
A weird way to say that Russia is currently winning a proxy war against all of NATO as the article I linked clearly explains. I guess if you had any reading comprehension you wouldn’t be making these imbecilic comments in the first place though.
Them winning has yet to be seen, but using your homeland’s full military force to win a proxy war isn’t exactly a flex, either.
Lol you think they’re using their full military force??? 😂
Doesn’t sound like you have much respect or hope for Ukraine. It had one of the strongest militaries in the world and has been supported by the world’s most militarily advanced countries before and during the war. It’s not like, let’s say, a war against farmers armed with AKs living in rural communities in a desert, the mountains, or a jungle – you know, the kinds of enemies NATO/allies take 20 years to lose against.
😂
What do you consider a big nation, mate?
I think Ukraine’s 36 Million compared to Russia’s 147 Million puts things pretty well into perspective.
Alright, so not so much small as smaller than Russia. Of course that means there are only 10 or so nations that aren’t small. How absurd it is then for NATO to be losing to tiny Russia…
Ukraine isn’t a part of NATO, lol. If they were, the USA would be on Russia Shores from the Pacific, and Russia would be invaded by the other 5 NATO members who share a border with them at a minimum, potentially including Turkiye from across the Sea who alone have a top 10 standing for military and they have already backed Ukraine’s membership approval.
I’m talking about the article. The United Kingdom isn’t Ukraine, and yet they’re talking about how they, the rest of NATO and Ukraine are losing to Russia at arms production.
Though the lessons translate to a hot war too. If you don’t have bombs to lob, you have to stop lobbing bombs.