Ukraine claims first drone evacuation of wounded soldier

Putin also declared he didn't want a war with Ukraine mere days before he started one [1]. You cannot believe a word that comes out of the mouth of any Russian official.

[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60392259

And yet they're still sending in troops with barely any ammunition worth the name. The Russian M.O. against the Ukrainian fortifications still is meatwaves.

> remember they had to bring in Korean soldiers?

And from what one can hear from the usual milblogger/OSINT/analyst crowd, the NK troops face brutal casualty rates as well [1].

For NK it's still a good deal, enough will survive the ordeal and return that they can teach their own army a bit about modern warfare.

[1] https://kyivindependent.com/north-korean-troops-took-over-7-...

AI today cannot effectively distinguish a 'convoy' from other vehicles on the road.

Many vehicles may not have military markings - it's hard for a human to make the inference.

Its quite interesting to think how much power is more a perception by others than a reality when tested. Just think about how many powers appeared invincible and then were tested and collapsed or how many victories and empires were simply because opponents gave up early.

America isnt a world power because it forgot how to be one. Primary example is their complete lack of research on drones and missiles. Firstly even during a war, Ukraine has managed to create a drone force, and the USA hasnt even started. Second example, look at the build rate for defensive missiles aka THAAD and Patriots. Given the military budget is amazing how few are actually built. Thirdly the reason the USA is having troubles and is unable to support a ground invasion is the Osprey continues to be broken and a failure after 20 something years of being accepted into service. Last example, the USA does not have sufficient auxiliary ships to supply carrier groups at distance. THis is an open secret mentioned in many places. They always assumed a lot of friendly bases nearby, except they lost everything in the Gulf and have only Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean which simply isnt enuff. The later is a perfect example of no planning, no backup plan which is exactly what seniors at the Pentagon should have planned and advised about. Logistics win war and here we see the US is lame because it doesnt have enough of them.

These are not 'point systems' with 'A on B' capabilities aka 'it works on this but not that'.

They are networked systems that work in the context of a layered AA strategy along with many other parts.

A single S300 system outside the context of a layered strategy is useless and will be picked off quickly.

We have ballpark estimations for their capabilities, and S400, in proper defensive posture, will hold out against anything NATO has ... for a while.

(Not accounting for 'magic' unknown gear that either side has)

AA defence will have long range radar, AWACS, satellite, other point systems, all kinds of EW (electronic warfare), and defensive patrols of various kinds. And we're now seeing Chinese passive systems deployed in Iran as well.

If that layered defence is very effectively managed, then it becomes very hard to pin the various pieces down. SEED munitions are maybe 60 miles range, and S400 can see F35's at 50 miles, that's a 'very tight' standoff even in a theoretical situation. If an adversary has AWACS then they're not going to use their tracking radars so the F35 has nothing to launch at.

There are all sorts of things adversaries can do to spook NATO AWACS off, push them back, which shortens the distance at which sorties can take place.

If a nation has 'all the layers' and they have good leadership, training, and are nimble and know what they are doing, they can be effective.

If there is 'kink in the armour' or the defence is piecemeal, it can be picked apart.

Think of it like those Roman Phalanx: we can't just say 'they have a certain shaped shield' - it's everything together. Coordination, training, tactics makes them hard to penetrate, but incompetence, exposed flank, etc. and they will break.

Also, Patriot is more capable, but given 'apparent doctrine' of limited munitions, the West has badly depleted inventories. Russia is pumping out enormous volumes of supplies. All of that means they get used differently.

I never said that at all, im simply saying helis have a limited range, and since all ships including any possibly landing ones are too far away because the ships are scared of the missiles and drones.

---

1. We don't want war, we are only defending ourselves!

2. Our adversary is solely responsible for this war!

3. Our adversary's leader is inherently evil and resembles the devil

4. We are defending a noble cause, not our particular interests!

5. The enemy is purposefully committing atrocities; if we are making mistakes this happens without intention

6. The enemy makes use of illegal weapons

7. We suffer few losses, the enemy's losses are considerable

8. Recognized intellectuals and artists support our cause

9. Our cause is sacred

10. Whoever casts doubt on our propaganda helps the enemy and is a traitor

---

Sound familiar? It was written 25 years ago. There's a reason in war that it often seems that it's only the losers that commit war crimes.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Basic_Principles_of_War_Pr...

Off-topic tangents and political/ideological battle are always forum-killers. HN is only here after two decades because we work so hard to avoid it.

If you have an actual new idea on how to make HN more interesting, you’re welcome to share it. Otherwise, please stop wasting everyone’s time.