One simply cannot be proficient at war if they throw away human lives the way the russian military does.
Military power comes from understeanding the power of valuing the human lives of your soldiers and experts, not becoming comfortable with dehumanizing them in suicidal mass waves…
That is insane.
Yeah I guess my point is what Canada needs isn’t necessarily an entire nation of militarized decentralized militias, what “asymmetric” means here is relative. Submarines, long range truck mounted anti-ship missiles, HIMARS type weapons that kind of thing.
Im sorry I meant to send those out last week! I will get on it.
Who is a more popular, effective communicator of Democratic party and politically left policy goals that you can point to as superior? Hasan is extremely skilled at explaining progressive policies in an approachable fashion.
The IDF is a genocide masquerading as a professional military.
Kick that stupid sign over and then get the hell out of Arizona it is a heat death and poverty trap.
The golden age of game development is over.
AI is so dumb but at least we have Ed Zitron.
I didn’t say don’t fight asymmetrically I am saying don’t be convinced drones make traditional military power obsolete, you still need ships, artillery, armored vehicles etc…
Please watch the interview I linked first, this comment is nonsense.
Although the possibility of massive earthquakes of magnitude 8 or stronger striking is higher than usual, the odds are around 1%, or 10 times higher compared with 0.1% in regular times, the JMA said.
Maybe I’m wrong and these submarines or MANPADS or planes could actually make a difference in a conflict, idk. But dollar for dollar, i can’t imagine it does better than a larger number of armed and trained light infantry among the populace. Especially given all we’re learning about cheap drones from Ukraine and Iran.
You are very wrong about this.
Don’t they agree on most things? Of course Merz must hate Trump for being loud and sloppy but aren’t their politics and policy goals entirely compatible?
Do you think this is a gotcha or something?
What?
At the end of the day I think it is a design optimized for the same basic principle as this complex of straight pipes in a steam locomotive.
I mean it is inspired by the M113, it makes sense that they would build them in aluminum if the material is available.
The M113 was the first aluminum hull combat vehicle to be put into mass production. Much lighter than earlier similar vehicles, its aluminum armor was designed to be thick enough to protect the crew and passengers against small arms fire, but light enough that the vehicle was air transportable and moderately amphibious.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113_armored_personnel_carrier
The big reason the M113 was designed to be made out of aluminum was for airlift capability, it makes sense to demonstrate the capacity to build an airlift capable M113 inspired traditional tracked APC in aluminum for eventual export interest even if the main production for Ukraine is done in a heavier Steel. The reasoning is obvious to me, Ukraine needs tracked APCs, if they are airliftable great, if they are lighter with less ground pressure great, if they are lighter so more anti-mine armor can be strapped on great, if they are more capable of amphibious operation because they are light fantastic… but ultimately more than any of that Ukraine needs APCs in large numbers for day to day operations on the front.
Ukraine also features quite a bit of littoral territory and designing a tracked APC in a very lightweight aluminum is a smart longterm decision as it is way harder to design an APC to be lighter and try to shoehorn amphibious capability into it than it is to prove the design in a lightweight metal and then build a cheaper metal version to scale up production alongside the aluminum version.
The Soviet Union in WW2 was actually capable of fighting a near peer military foe. Their tanks, aircraft, artillery and other equipment were for the most part equivalent to German counterparts if inferior to a degree arguably. Whatever, I am not interested in discussing the details between Soviet Union/lend-lease equipment and German equipment but suffice to say there wasn’t a radical difference like there is today when Ukraine can field a Leopard to repel a russian T-55 with some metal junk welded to it.
By the end of WW2 The Soviet Union had learned how to Blitz, they had learned combined arms. Yes, the doctrine was inefficient in manpower, an astounding amount of people died on the eastern front but that doesn’t change the fact that russia was showing up to the battle with an analog to the military they were fighting.
Nowadays in 2025/2026 in the Ukraine War russians find themselves advancing with completely obsolete tanks, no artillery support close enough to matter, no air support and poor combined arms tactics to integrate drone recon with infantry movement and artillery.
World War 1 proved human wave tactics were pointlessly wasteful and ineffective. World War 2 only doubly emphasized that reality and the powers that refused to adapt paid dearly in loss of human life.