>

Bomb that area and move on
“Instead, the Kremlin has drafted—or lured into service with huge cash bonuses—hundreds of thousands of unhappy and largely unfit men, many of them in middle age. Barely trained, minimally equipped and ambivalently led, these draftees die fast and easy in battle with hardened Ukrainian troops.” 
I like the term “ambivalently lead.” We could attack and maybe seize some territory, or we could go home. Idk. I’m ambivalent >

I just dont get why they are so badly eqipped, a basic decent gun such as AR-15 costs from $500(?) thats peanuts compared to what a tank or fighter jet costs, one lost fighter could have bought truckloads of guns. >

You just answered your own question.  The gun is worth more that the person. Putin would rather send 2 people in unequipped than 1 equipped because it saves him $500. It doesn’t make sense, but thats why they call it twisted logic. >

Using classic Russian WWI tactics. >

Also WWII >

How convenient >

Almost like a Patriot missile target? >

The patriot missile is a surface to air missile, and so would only be used against targets in the air. >

So when the tanks are blown up and the turrets fly into the air... >

True, maybe this was Putin’s 8D Chess master plan.
You see, he predicted 10 months ago that the US would give Ukraine Patriot missiles, so he sent his tanks in to be blown up so that once the turrets fly up, the patriot system would lock on them, thus acting as decoys for Russian cruise missile attacks, genius. >

Tip of the spear that Russia is driving into itself >

What happen to those T-14s they were showing off some years ago >

All ~~7~~ ~~6~~ 5 are still accounted for and sometimes they even move under their own power! >

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot)


Russian arms firm Uralvagonzavod has manufactured around 600 T-90 tanks for the Russian army.
It's an impressive feat for the Russian army to mass two battalions of T-90s. Before the current war, the Russians on paper had more than 600 T-90s. But 200 were in storage-and in cold, wet Russia, modern tanks with their delicate optics and electronics tend to degrade fast while not in routine use.
The Russian army never had enough trained infantry to screen its tanks.


Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Russian^#1 tank^#2 Svatove^#3 T-90^#4 Ukrainian^#5 >

T-90s were never stored in the open long term. Also there were only around 120 ever made. Russia also had around 200 T-90As (later on some were upgraded to AM standard). From 2011 only AM (MS) and from 2020 only M versions were manufactured, while older models were slowly upgraded to the M standard. And basically those waiting for upgrades were in long term storage. So I wouldn't just write them off like the author did. >

I was so hoping to see those active countermeasures in action and instead they mounted chicken coups... >

Severodonetsk, another meat grinder. >

Ukraine will hopefully destroy their support trucks and then keep the tanks. >

Perhaps that's just where they ran out of gas. >

So the 3 that still work then? >

50 but It's basically saying those 50 are going to get fucked up due to lack of support.
Each tank has 3 people that will be burning to death or being killed from the explosion, so ruptured eyes and internal organs, seared lungs from super heated air, blown out ear drums and shrapnel damage.
It had 600 on paper but 200 broke before the war because the tech doesn't last, so they are not ideal.

So in fact, the Russian army had just 400 T-90s before February. And after February, it lost at least 36 of the tanks in combat with Ukrainian forces. That brings the total T-90 inventory down to around 360, of which at least 50 now are around Svatove. >

That's to say nothing of the tank crews.  Training a standard infantryman is tough enough, as evidenced by the years long boot camp most nations have, but a tank crew has to know the vehicle AND how to work in tandem with their crewmates.
​
You can't just find three random farmboys, jam them into a tank and say start driving. Best case scenario, they don't know how to use it, worst case they load the shell backwards and blow the damn thing up. >

You’re overestimating somewhat.  Per the US Army’s recruitment site, training from civilian to baseline M1 crewman is 22 weeks. >

but to put that in some perspective, the end of that 22 weeks is just the start of ojt with your unit where you actually learn how to fight and work as a team…even infantry training will get you to your line unit in 6 months tops but you won’t really be an asset til youve spent at least as much time training with your platoon >

Absolutely true - I was responding to the poster above’s notion that basic training takes years.