Thanks, great article! However, this part: "This weapon has kinetic energy warheads that each deliver ~400 kg of explosive force, making its total explosive yield more than 14 kilotons." is incorrect. 400 * 36 = 14 400 kg = 14.4 tons not kilotons. While Oreshnik is indeed a formidable weapon because it gives Russia an ability to disable large air and naval bases without going nuclear, it is not as formidable.
I have been studying this conflict since 2014 when it was the big story in globalresearch.ca although nowhere else...
I want to say I agree with your general thesis, that Russia is at least as, or likely more powerful a military than any other, especially at home, where it counts.
I do think the most recent prisoners swaps exchangers support an assertion of a ten to one casualty rate, for each Russian killed, which I believe to be about 100,000
But perhaps as high as 150,000
That there are in Ukraine side so also those who fight for Ukraine, likely 1,000,000 killed, in fact far more now, with about two thousand killed for Ukraine every day.
I was impressed that you report, the Russians pay more to soldiers than America.
Welcome to substack
My sources are, the Duran, the Scott Ritter, the dialogue works, the smoothiex12 Andre martyanov, the Garland Nixon presidency, the demoRats obviously bought Ukraine, ScKamala lost it for them, maybe if she hadn't put me in jail, funny they could a had most all of it if they had just been willing to make peace instead of trying to cancel Russia what a bunch of dumb ass shits Blinken kabal proved to be
Well said Grasshopper! Yeah, Ritters estimates in that interview with Nima are staggering, although as this author and others point out, there's good reason to believe we won't have even a semi-accurate assessment for quite some time.
point II is a great argument for why the US needs Ukraine, to have access to the battle-proven, most up-to-date defense technology. the US should consider investing in that Ukrainian technology for access to the tech and information emerging threats, channeling finance into Ukrainian made defense solutions in the meantime as an investment into global security
No, Ukraine is. You can tell 'The west' aren't involved because their overwhelming air superiority isn't carpet-bombing the Russian front line and their supporting logistics with near-total impunity and their Naval forces aren't off the coast destroying every facility of value within c. 1,000 miles.
Although this 'essay' does posit that 'The west' are vastly inferior so...
Regardless of the vast amounts of cherrypicking in your piece, the fact remains that Russia is barely making headway against a supposedly vastly inferior foe, in a war Russia chose to initiate at a time and place of their choosing. Ukraine barely even has an airforce or Navy. Yet, according to you, Russia's inability to best Ukraine means it could handily beat the US and NATO? Huge military, WMDs, recent war experience, easily beat the US... I'm sure Sadam Hussein held a lot of the same thoughts. Remind me, how long did Gulf War I last?
And now this…..’Russia and NATO each possess several thousand strategic nuclear weapons and hypersonic delivery systems like ICBM, MIRV, and HGV’. It is common knowledge that NATO most definitely does NOT possess hypersonic weaponry. Am starting to seriously question this writers competence, in the area of military analysis. 🤔 His take on KIA seems way off also…. Parity KIA between the combatants, when Russia has always enjoyed between 5:1 - 10:1 advantage in artillery systems & ammunition, and when Russia has air supremacy over the contact line? Sadly, I don’t think this article has enhanced the authors reputation. 😞
Thank you for the feedback. The term "hypersonics" usually refers to hypersonic glide vehicles (HGV), which, as you correctly noted, have not been fielded by the West. However, ICBM also travel at hypersonic speeds and can be accurately referred to as hypersonic missiles. ICBM achieve this speed simply by exiting the atmosphere to reduce drag. HGV achieve the speed in the atmosphere, which is a much more technologically complex feat. I would be happy to accept new sources on KIA ratios, but they must be verified by name like UALosses and Mediazona.
OMG, it gets worse 🫣. I thought the Oreshnik error was just a typo. Next sentence…… ‘This is the equivalent of seventy FAB-500 glide bombs or a single tactical nuclear weapon’. The author actually believes that a single Oreshnik packs a 14 Kilotonne punch. That kinda destroys the whole article. 😞
Thanks, great article! However, this part: "This weapon has kinetic energy warheads that each deliver ~400 kg of explosive force, making its total explosive yield more than 14 kilotons." is incorrect. 400 * 36 = 14 400 kg = 14.4 tons not kilotons. While Oreshnik is indeed a formidable weapon because it gives Russia an ability to disable large air and naval bases without going nuclear, it is not as formidable.
Thank you for the correction.
Almost perfect... Still phenomenal read! BIG UPS!
You got a big shout out today from Alexander Mercouris at the Duran.
came here from him. going to read the article as it appears good
Alexander was right, this is a good article, thanks for putting in the hard work.
I second this. Lotta work, thought, insight, analysis, and historical contrast.
I have been studying this conflict since 2014 when it was the big story in globalresearch.ca although nowhere else...
I want to say I agree with your general thesis, that Russia is at least as, or likely more powerful a military than any other, especially at home, where it counts.
I do think the most recent prisoners swaps exchangers support an assertion of a ten to one casualty rate, for each Russian killed, which I believe to be about 100,000
But perhaps as high as 150,000
That there are in Ukraine side so also those who fight for Ukraine, likely 1,000,000 killed, in fact far more now, with about two thousand killed for Ukraine every day.
I was impressed that you report, the Russians pay more to soldiers than America.
Welcome to substack
My sources are, the Duran, the Scott Ritter, the dialogue works, the smoothiex12 Andre martyanov, the Garland Nixon presidency, the demoRats obviously bought Ukraine, ScKamala lost it for them, maybe if she hadn't put me in jail, funny they could a had most all of it if they had just been willing to make peace instead of trying to cancel Russia what a bunch of dumb ass shits Blinken kabal proved to be
Well said Grasshopper! Yeah, Ritters estimates in that interview with Nima are staggering, although as this author and others point out, there's good reason to believe we won't have even a semi-accurate assessment for quite some time.
Great article - thanks very much.
point II is a great argument for why the US needs Ukraine, to have access to the battle-proven, most up-to-date defense technology. the US should consider investing in that Ukrainian technology for access to the tech and information emerging threats, channeling finance into Ukrainian made defense solutions in the meantime as an investment into global security
Lmao! They’re losing the war. Why on earth would you invest in losers?!
Also: All of their “up to date defense technology” is American anyways.
When you play with fire, you finish by burning yourself.
Impressive how Europeans over estimated themselves, they were so blind by their own sense of entitlement that they shoot themselves selves on the toe.
This EU wishful thought turned into a religious favour. Reality is a bit_h!
It’s staggering how your analysis hues to what you want to be true.
Stop pretending to be an analyst. You’re an advocate. Both are fine. Just be honest with yourself and the people who read your work.
No, Ukraine is. You can tell 'The west' aren't involved because their overwhelming air superiority isn't carpet-bombing the Russian front line and their supporting logistics with near-total impunity and their Naval forces aren't off the coast destroying every facility of value within c. 1,000 miles.
Although this 'essay' does posit that 'The west' are vastly inferior so...
Regardless of the vast amounts of cherrypicking in your piece, the fact remains that Russia is barely making headway against a supposedly vastly inferior foe, in a war Russia chose to initiate at a time and place of their choosing. Ukraine barely even has an airforce or Navy. Yet, according to you, Russia's inability to best Ukraine means it could handily beat the US and NATO? Huge military, WMDs, recent war experience, easily beat the US... I'm sure Sadam Hussein held a lot of the same thoughts. Remind me, how long did Gulf War I last?
The west is a vastly inferior foe?
And now this…..’Russia and NATO each possess several thousand strategic nuclear weapons and hypersonic delivery systems like ICBM, MIRV, and HGV’. It is common knowledge that NATO most definitely does NOT possess hypersonic weaponry. Am starting to seriously question this writers competence, in the area of military analysis. 🤔 His take on KIA seems way off also…. Parity KIA between the combatants, when Russia has always enjoyed between 5:1 - 10:1 advantage in artillery systems & ammunition, and when Russia has air supremacy over the contact line? Sadly, I don’t think this article has enhanced the authors reputation. 😞
Thank you for the feedback. The term "hypersonics" usually refers to hypersonic glide vehicles (HGV), which, as you correctly noted, have not been fielded by the West. However, ICBM also travel at hypersonic speeds and can be accurately referred to as hypersonic missiles. ICBM achieve this speed simply by exiting the atmosphere to reduce drag. HGV achieve the speed in the atmosphere, which is a much more technologically complex feat. I would be happy to accept new sources on KIA ratios, but they must be verified by name like UALosses and Mediazona.
OMG, it gets worse 🫣. I thought the Oreshnik error was just a typo. Next sentence…… ‘This is the equivalent of seventy FAB-500 glide bombs or a single tactical nuclear weapon’. The author actually believes that a single Oreshnik packs a 14 Kilotonne punch. That kinda destroys the whole article. 😞
Twas corrected, settle down steveohh. Deep breaths.
Oreshnik. 14 tonnes TNT equivalent, not 14 kilotonnes. How did that get thru the edit? Errors like that undermine an entire article. More care needed.
NATO is basically the USA. Without it, NATO is like a raincoat with no one inside it.
Definitely time for a new security architecture in Europe. One that satisfies both Russian and European needs.
We can’t beat them militarily and can’t afford to rearm. It’s time for the one thing that hasn’t been tried yet: Diplomacy and negotiations.
Great in depth article. Well researched