Subbed. Good to see another independent voice in this war.

@cbhlde

20 күн бұрын

Good decision! DPA is really good and unbiased!

@moisiewe

20 күн бұрын

And he's from Aaaaaaaasiaa😂

@aniksamiurrahman6365

20 күн бұрын

Welcome!

@cbhlde

20 күн бұрын

@@moisiewe And he has wife and kids and home. So based, so based! 😁😇

@moisiewe

20 күн бұрын

@@cbhlde i just like when he says it ..thats all.

Good Night Commander!

Thanks Wyatt.

DPA strong

It's been an honor being subscribe to this channel for about 2 years now 🗿🗿💥

@cbhlde

20 күн бұрын

Same here! Let us collect more people! ;p

@ccdsds3221

20 күн бұрын

@@cbhldeI already collected 3 in my basement.

@cbhlde

20 күн бұрын

@@ccdsds3221 😍🥰

Thanks

Number one

get some rest , man. the bags under your eyes aren't looking good. just take a week off. the war will still be here when you get back.

@t.n.h.ptheneohumanpatterna8334

20 күн бұрын

Idc about his sleep continue updating 😂

Cascading lines

Aaaaaaaaaasia! Why are u guys telling Commander to take a break? Common

For what date is this?

I think I'm in the minority in that I never really understand what is going on in this war. But here's one of my attempts. Part of the explanation for Putler's recent success is the glide bombs. In my theory: the introduction of massive bombs on demand has broken the Ukrainian super power of not moving. The difference between a 152 shell and Fab 1500 is exponential. If you're in a hole a 152 doesn't seem to pose all that much danger unless it hits you directly and you pretty much know the angle of attack. So if you're in defilade you're not too worried. While a 152 will usually only visit from about 30 degrees of the compass, you can't be as sure of the direction of attack from a JDAM. Thus, no stronghold, trenchline or bunker can be held if the Russians micro focus on that spot. (Also important to understand that the "spot" isn't that big. Even the largest bomb is only clearing at most 50 yards of fortification- so you need lots of bombs) The most popular theory on the new front is that it will stretch the Ukrainians and force a dilemma on where to put their troops. The question is can the Russian air force maintain FAB saturation on the larger front line enough to actually force that dilemma? IE without FAB saturation Ukrainians aren't moving and the attrition battle continues with an unfavorable ratio to the side trying to dig out the defender. With FAB saturation the russians can eliminate strongholds, create Kessels and take land with a favorable attrition ratio. I hear Vovchansk is getting saturated currently.... Are all the planes up by Kharkiv? or is Chasiv Yar, Krasnohirivka etc still eating glide bombs at the same rate? or something in between. I'm speaking in the declarative about things I'm only guessing. If I've got something wrong I'd love to hear it.

@Merces69

20 күн бұрын

yes you re right but its not just that, they have improved tactics, they are well rested and reorganised after the initial retreat, they keep adapting. their initial attempt was a western style fast invasion it didn't work. NATO supervision worked at first but NATO does not have experience in modern warfare only insurgency/ counter insurgency/air supremacy. Russia got the bad taste at first as well but now they know what is modern warfare and with the logistics and ressource to back it up, the party is over for UA. glide bombs are just more of that adaptation. also saying this is putin's army is just lame language from mass media that still believes it can start a revolution in russia. that's a bit cringe. FAB has nullified air defence of ukraine at the front.

@flyingpharoah4867

20 күн бұрын

The explanation is that Russia never intended to invade Ukraine in the first place. 100k troops were nowhere near enough to invade Ukraine, and Russia never said it would take over Ukraine, much less in 3 days. Russia tried to force Ukraine to negotiate in trying to blitz Kiev, but negotiations fell through when Johnson got involved. When that failed, Russia shortened the frontline to gain time (time was always on Russia’s side), giving Westerners the illusion of decisive victories in Kherson and Kharkiv, so it could build its military and ready it for a real invasion. In the meantime, it engaged in attrition, massacring the AFU and thinning its numbers (which explains Ukraine’s massive manpower shortage and goes to show that the casualty numbers are a farce), as well as stopping Ukraine from exporting its wheat. Now that it’s ready (reshuffled the leadership, fought corruption, rearmed, developed its arms industry further, amassed and trained troops which explains the much better tactics used in the field), it’s unleashing. Not to mention how Russia first had to survive and beat Western sanctions to transition to an economy of war and ensure Chinese cooperation, which it did. Game changing weapons are a myth. They don’t exist. Neither Ukraine or Russia can rely on them to change the course of the war. Never has any country in modern times won a war because of a technological advantage, which would have to be massive to make a difference. Ukraine never managed to route the Russians, not once during the entire war, much less break through Russian fortifications. The best it could muster were tactical victories which have proven to be strategic defeats. Those who are shocked to see Russia winning drank their own cool aid aka wartime propaganda. You can hate Russia and Putin all you want (which your use of derogatory terms like "Putler" showcases), but you’re only hurting yourself when you underestimate them.

@bobcougar77

20 күн бұрын

​@@Merces69 I agree with all that. I understand I'm oversimplifying with the FAB variable. It's hard to even talk about something as complex as war without doing so. Without all the other adaptations the Russians have made the glide bombs would not overcrest the dam (in my argument) I do however think the introduction of the glide bombs has been the biggest "game changer" in this war, with the possible exception of drones- but both sides have those. My claim is they are only tool the Russians can deploy that allows them to efficiently negate static positions. I'm inserting a bit of irony with the term Putler. The constant personification of Russia by the Biden regime and their subsidiaries (europe, the press) Is a laughably obvious bit of propaganda to allow their constituents to not think too hard about the casus belli of this war. I think this has been one of many massive strategic mistakes from the west that I lump into "oh shit, we made this war existential for Russia" The Mongols always left a way out... We are so dumb we slammed the door completely against a nuclear power. I use it to shed light on the absurdity of our propaganda.

@bobcougar77

20 күн бұрын

@@flyingpharoah4867 My intention is to talk about the glide bombs narrowly and their impact on the current situation. You've gone pretty broad in your response so I'll try to reply in kind. I agree with the first part of your comment. I think you're exactly right about the start of the war. But I think you go too far out on the limb in the second half. Technological advantage absolutely can and has won wars. -just not necessarily the peace. But that's a whole other ball of wax. I think you also go a bit far in minimizing the successes of Ukraine. The offensive in the North was a massive strategic setback for Russia. They would absolutely love to still have Izum. There will be a heavy blood price to get back what they lost. It's too early to say the significance of the loss of the right bank of the Dnieper in Kherson. I think that will be revealed in the final stage of this war. It may be of little consequence or it may turn out to be huge. How much of that was Ukraine being effective vs Russia mistakes really isn't important now the land is gone and will have to be retaken. "Game changing weapons are a myth" For the most part is a true statement. I already stated my case in the other comment but I'll add that Glide bombs are a whole category of weapons that the other side doesn't significantly posses. "My super tank is rated at 98 and you're shitty tank is a mere 87" is a whole different question than "I can blow up your bunker from 30 miles away and you don't have any defense and can't retaliate in kind." I use the term Putler ironically (see my other comment)

Repeating ??

I prefer the crazy looking Ukrainian guy who always has his thumbs up. I'm not a big fan of honest, unbiased information.

DPA you are adding too much weight. I would recommend that you go to the front line

@thomas4315

20 күн бұрын

Reality hard to eat no?

And for the rest is russia ok of is it only advance 😂

@flyingpharoah4867

20 күн бұрын

English please

Trump 2024

Trump 2024