this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
197 points (89.2% liked)

World News

32311 readers
799 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Western-made armor is failing in Ukraine because it wasn't designed to sustain a conflict of this intensity, a military analyst told The Wall Street Journal.

Taras Chmut, a military analyst who's the head of the Come Back Alive Foundation, which has raised money to purchase and provide arms and equipment to Ukraine, said that "a lot of Western armor doesn't work here because it had been created not for an all-out war but for conflicts of low or medium intensity."

"If you throw it into a mass offensive, it just doesn't perform," he said.

Chmut went on to say Ukraine's Western allies should instead turn their attention to delivering simpler and cheaper systems, but in larger quantities, something Ukraine has repeatedly requested, the newspaper reported.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zephyreks@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, how's that worked out?

Pulled out of Korea, pulled out of Vietnam, pulled out of Iraq, pulled out of Afghanistan.

The US achieves nothing through its invasions except (when successful) overthrowing a government and allowing a more corrupt and despotic government to take it's place. Why would China want to do that?

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, we didn't pull out because it was impossible to wage a war there. We pulled out because it became clear that we can't win the hearts and minds of a populace by bombing them into the stone age.

War has never been a problem for the US. Understanding local customs, elevating popular representative leaders and providing resources for reconstruction... that's typically been the weak point.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, we didn’t pull out because it was impossible to wage a war there.

We pulled out because it became clear that we can’t win the hearts and minds of a populace by bombing them into the stone age.

Said right in the same paragraph without a hint of irony

War isn't about killing people, it is about achieving strategic objectives. The former is literally how the nazis viewed warfare and was antiquated back then.

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh, glad to hear you think war isn't about killing people. What a nice little world you live in.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

War involves killing people, the goal of war isn't to kill people. Do i need to explain the difference between a method and a goal?

[–] Bytemeister@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's like saying you don't have to be good at kicking a ball to play soccer, since the goal is to just get the ball in the net.

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml -3 points 1 year ago

No, that's like saying if you can only kick you're not going to be good at getting the ball in.