@Picard Croatia no longer glorifies Ustase right?
I will start caring about that once our politicians and historians stop glorifying the Communists. As bad as the Ustashi were, at least they weren't out to
destroy Croatia outright.
the croat and serb war depends on tank variation used as you might have not known T-72s have different class armor and can use different sabot rounds. Leopard 2A4s were getting destroyed by konkurs and fagots in the syrian war and even the latest variations of leopards 2s wont make it magically immune to Kornets atleast the U.S. has learned from the jews to use a projectile APS system.
When Russians retreated from Kherson there were no bodies everywhere or destroyed equipment that Julian Roepke was like where is all the destroyed russian equipment? When Ukrainians retreated from Soledar these were the results.
Ukraine claims that 30k out of 40k Wagners were wiped out, but if that was the case, they would need re-enforcements to regroup not attack in all directions again towards Bakhmut or Seversk. I have seen like a report 2 months ago were Russians claim like 800 tanks were wiped out with 5 of them being T-90s but if you even gave a shit about the war ukrainians even when they pushed the russians back gave 5 to 1 russian loss ratios when they launhced offensives in september.
Both sides in Croatian war used anything from T-55 to M-84 (which at the time was one of the most advanced tanks in the world). In Vukovar specifically, Serbs lost at least a hundred armored vehicles of which maybe half a dozen to dozen M-84 tanks. Main issue for Serbs were tactics - M-84s were not well escorted by infantry - but on the flip side, Croatian troops in Vukovar had very limited supplies of anti-tank weapons. So limited, in fact, that they had to rely on improvization, like literally throwing AT mine under the track because there weren't enough mines to create a minefield.
What is important there is that during the first phase of the war, we had literally no support from the West (which makes me rather wary of Western plans for Ukraine should it win this war... Ukraine is basically
Homer Simpson in this clip). West, and especially the EU, declared weapons embargo and were content so sit back and wait for Serbia to conquer us. Only countries which provided serious help were Argentine and former Warsaw Pact countries - Poland, Hungary, Ukraine etc. Not sure about Russia, but even if it didn't help outright, it did basically turn a blind eye... Main enemies of Croatia at the time, outside Serbia, were United Kingdom (which proposed that Serbia and Croatia should have common rule (condominium) over Baranja and Eastern Slavonia; and United States.
All of this meant that Croatian army was down to using improvised antitank weapons, World War 2 vintage artillery and whatever could be captured. Yet Yugoslav Army and Serb rebels
still bled tanks like crazy when faced with these. Granted, majority of these tanks were T-55, but some T-72 and M-84 tanks were also destroyed.
How important is this? Well, everybody - from Croatian leadership to YNA planners and foreign observers - expected Vukovar to fall within two days. City was defended by few hundred members of the regular army (ZNG) and Special Police Forces and little over a thousand volunteers. Of antitank weapons, they had few hundred outdated "Zolja" RPGs and maybe a dozen modern "Osa", as well as some antitank mines - which, as I said, had to be placed right in front of the tank so it would run over it.
Despite all of that, losses at Vukovar essentially destroyed the offensive power of the Yugoslav Army. From that point onwards, most fighting would be done by Serb rebels.
And that is why I am so sceptical of Russian claims. From what I have seen, everybody - from Western observers to Russian planners - has underestimated the value and combat strength of well-organized territorial militia fighting defensively.
You still need professional troops for offensive, maneuver operations, of course; but militia cannot be discounted and should not be underestimated.
As for claims: as I said, both sides lie. If either side's claims were correct, the other side should have been rendered combat-incapable months ago.
Oryx claims are also not to be taken as 100%truth also,because he made claims Ukraine captured 1000s of vehicles,and Ukraine had small losses. In June last year he claimed Ukraine lost just over a 1000 armoured vehicles and lost single digit numbers of helicopters. A Ukrainian official admitted nearly 2500 armoured vehicles lost to an American defence website,including 400 tanks in that period:
"The commander of the logistics of the Command of the Ground Forces, Vladimir Karpenko, spoke about this in an interview with National Defense.
“I won’t talk about anti-tank guided missiles or anti-tank guided weapons yet. I’m talking only about heavy weapons. Today we have about 30-40%, and sometimes up to 50% of equipment losses as a result of active battles. Thus, we have lost about 50% lost about 1,300 infantry fighting vehicles, 400 tanks and 700 artillery systems,” Karpenko said."
That is before Ukraine went on their offensives later in the year,which as you said means heavier losses of vehicles in such scenarios.
Ukraine had over 1000 operational tanks before the war started. Nearly 2000 pieces of artillery and rocket launchers,1000s of armoured crew transport vehicles,etc.
Poland and other countries supplied 100s of tanks and 1000s of armoured vehicles(think in total we have supplied over 3000 vehicles so far):
www.oryxspioenkop.com
So if you add the 1000s of vehicles Ukraine had before the war,the 3000 Oryx claimed they have captured and the over 4000 vehicles we supplied so far,why is Ukraine needing more vehicles if losses are so low as claimed on twitter? He was saying Ukraine had more vehicles now than before the war started.
Now we are supplying front line tanks,etc which are being drawn from our frontline reserves which one conclude means heavy losses of Ukrainian armour. Nobody needs to look at any claims from both sides or from social media to see this.
True enough, but I doubt Ukraine had received 10 000 or more tanks that it would need to make up for all the losses Russians have claimed to have inflicted. Unless, of course, significant number of lost vehicles are returned to service later.
You claim the Russians are doing poorly in Ukraine because they are using thousands of tanks with a 125mm smooth bore gun that can destroy any armored vehicle and tank used by Ukraine. If that's the best logical argument you can make, Ukraine is in big trouble.
I claim that Russians are using tanks which historically have proven not very difficult to destroy, which makes Ukrainian claims of heavy Russian tank losses more believable. Of course, Ukrainians are also using same tank models.
Sorry westoid, we are not invested in this war as much as you are, so we have a higher moral authority to guage the facts- you don't.
Go back to kindergarten, please.
Moral authority is no authority at all. The only moral argument that deserves to be made is that any and every ethnic group deserves to have conditions in which its survival will be guaranteed.
Ah yes, the known fact that made US lose far more troops and equipment than Iraq or Afghanistan when attacking. Sure Sure.
we don't care for your westoid propaganda, simple.
Ah yes, because fighting third world desert rats is the same as fighting European army.
Iraqis literally went "May I surrender now, pretty please?" the moment bombs started falling. They surrendered to UAVs and journalists, for crying out loud.
When was the last time you saw Ukrainian soldiers surrendering to a news crew?
Same reason we see hunk of junk POS A-10 warthogs and Panavia tornados in Iraq - if your obsolete shit is good enough, you use obsolete shit first. Duh.
Neither of these were obsolete at the time, and are not even now.