Let's Be Honest Russian Military SUCKS - Here's the Proof... (You Tube)

you tube ^ | May 3, 2025 | The Military Show

[dennisw]

Let's Be Honest Russian Military SUCKS - Here's the Proof...

The Military Show 1.63M subscribers

307,691 views #militarydevelopments #themilitaryshow #militaryanalysis

Russia’s military was once feared—but Ukraine exposed the truth.

From rusted tanks and fake armor to outdated tactics and corruption, the Russian war machine is crumbling in real time.

In this video, we break down how one of the "world’s strongest" armies became a global embarrassment.

[Kazan]

Since April 1, 2025, Ukrainian forces advanced slightly back into Kursk and retook some ground near Pokrovsk.

You are numbskull if you think Ukraine's attempt to occupy Kursk was or is a good idea. But, that are you one isn't in question.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0q198zyppqo

Ukrainian soldiers fighting in Russia's Kursk region have described scenes "like a horror movie" as they retreated from the front lines.

The BBC has received extensive accounts from Ukrainian troops, who recount a "catastrophic" withdrawal in the face of heavy fire, and columns of military equipment destroyed and constant attacks from swarms of Russian drones.

The soldiers, who spoke over social media, were given aliases to protect their identity. Some gave accounts of a "collapse" as Ukraine lost Sudzha, the largest town it held.

[Kazan]

"Conquered and oppressed" is the correct description of Russians' rape of eastern Ukraine.

YOU'RE A LIAR and this is biggest lie of all.

The people in Donetsk, Lugansk, Crimea and the annexed all voted overwhelmingly for Yanukovych, who is impeached illegal without the proper votes needed for impeachment. So, duh, of course, the people there didn't want to remain part of Ukraine after a President they voted for was illegal removed from office.

The annexed area was part of Russia until the middle of last century and was and is ethnic and culturally Russian.

There are dozens of interviews available online with the people there that say they view the Ukrainian nationalists in charge of Ukraine as their oppressors and the Russians as their liberators. Specifically, UK citizen and journalist Graham Phillips, whose videos are available on Rumble, has conducted such interviews.

This comment proves a lying, despicable propagandists you are.

[Steven Tyler]

Oh, you again!
You are not worth my time and effort

[BroJoeK]

Slingwing: "Ever think Putty knows the longer this goes the more Ukraine’s corruption gets exposed and the general public will tire of the tax base funding a war that has no national interest.
It is much like Korea and more important Vietnam."

2024 Corruption Perceptions Index:

As far back as 1998, Ukraine's alleged corruption was never more than Russia's, and has become progressively less a factor over the past 20+ years.
In 2019 Volodymyr Zelensky and his Servant of the People party were elected, in large part, on their promises of good government and anti-corruption.
In the years since there have been a steady stream of investigations, prosecutions and convictions of corrupt Ukrainian officials, alongside a steady rise in Ukraine's internationally recognized "Corruption Perceptions Index".
Today, Ukraine is not perfect -- it's equivalent to India, Turkey & Brazil, all US allies -- but is a far cry from Russia, which is still mired at the bottom of the list as one of the most corrupt countries in the world.

So, yes, "corruption" was a major argument in the pro-Russia Left's defeat of the US in Vietnam, but, try as they might, you cannot make "corruption" work again in Ukraine.

Slingwing: "The public is tiring of watching their money go down a sinkhole with nothing in return."

That argument ended with the April 30, 2025 signing of the Ukraine–United States Mineral Resources Agreement.
All future US aid will now be secured by Ukraine's rare earth and other mineral resources.

Slingwing: "Ukraine has many ethnic Russians, they speak Russian, they use the same equipment and tactics."

Sure, and Ukraine's Pres. Zelensky spoke Russian at home as a boy -- it's irrelevant.
Nearly all older Ukrainians learned Russian as children, some spoke Russian at home and some even considered themselves ethnic Russians.

Likewise, in the US, many Americans, including my family a few generations ago, spoke a foreign language at home and considered themselves to be more people from their "old country" than of their new citizenship.
But when wars came (i.e., 1776, 1861, 1917, 1941), they still volunteered and served honorably.

As for Ukraine's equipment and tactics, that was certainly true some 30 years ago, but has become progressively less true with each passing year and each new Russian aggression against Ukraine.

As of today, Ukraine's military is roughly 2/3 Western/NATO equipment & trained, 1/3 old Soviet legacy stuff -- with much of that provided by other European countries who then upgraded their own arsenals.

Slingwing: "Where Ukraine went off the rails is listening to CIA and allowing it to install a puppet government and lander money so the military industrial complex and congress could profit."

All of that kind of talk is babbling fact-free Russian propaganda nonsense.
The truth is that Russia has not had a free and fair presidential election since 2000, while Ukraine has held five and elected five different presidents, from five different parties -- all internationally observed as free & fair.

As for the US "military industrial complex (MIC)", it has never been more atrophied and ineffective than it is today.
Today our military is 1/3 less than it was just 15 years ago (relative to GDP) and barely half the military force which confronted the Old Soviets under Pres. Reagan.

So, the idea that the US "military industrial complex (MIC)" is forcing anybody to do anything is ridiculous.
Rather, the MIC has been gutted & ineffective for years and the results in lost deterrence and increased warfare (Ukraine, Middle East, China, now even India-Pakistan, plus many more smaller wars) are obvious.

Slingwing: "This is pure propaganda to sway opinion."

I agree that you have posted a lot of false propaganda hoping to sway the opinions of otherwise patriotic FReeper Americans.

[BroJoeK]

nuconvert #7: "The pro Russia/Putin wing of FR isn’t going to like this.
15 yrs ago I wouldn’t have dreamed there’d be such a thing here."

Jan_Sobieski: "When all you follow is mainstream mockingbird media, how could you ever exit the echo chamber?
Enjoy your blissful ignorance."

In my experience, the general tone on Free Republic is somewhat different from what it was just 15 years ago, with many on the pro-Russia "Right" now taking over the anti-American duties from our older generation of pro-Russian Leftist Democrats.

But curiously, our now allegedly "right wing" conservative isolationists are still using all the same arguments that pro-Russia Leftist Democrats used to defeat the US in Vietnam some 50 years ago.

Yes, today's pro-Russians do have a few new insults to throw out -- i.e., "neo-con" and "globo-homo-alist" -- but their basic arguments are all the same: 1) the US is evil, 2) our allies are corrupt, and 3) the Russians are unstoppable, so that's why we have to turn tails and run for the hills!

How pro-Russians defeated the US in Vietnam 50 years ago.
The Fall of Saigon, April 30, 1975:

[BroJoeK]

icclearly: "You keep on promoting the endless wars that we've been fighting (and losing) for the last 50 years.
I challenge you to explain how we're gonna pay off $37 trillion in debt from these ever-ending wars.
Better yet, I challenge you to explain how this house of cards is not heading toward an unsustainable end."

The key point you need to grasp is that the US national debt -- some $37 trillion -- has nothing to do with defense spending.
Proof of that is here:

Do you see the 1945 peak in post-WWII debt-to-GDP ratio?
After that peak, the US debt-to-GDP ratio fell every year for over 30 years!

During those years, US defense spending ranged from 15% of GDP during the Korean War to nearly 10% during Vietnam, IOW, multiple times greater than today's defense spending, and yet... the debt went down every year.

So, US national debt has nothing to do with defense spending.
It has everything to do with corruption in our political classes, especially Big Government, Big Spending Leftist Democrats.

National defense keeps the peace ("peace throuth strength") and peace is essential to everything else we do.

[Jan_Sobieski]

Read Anthony Sutton’s Wall Street Trilogy! Great series on how the US Government, Big Banks, And Big business funded the Soviets the from the early 1900s on (he has the ledgers proving it). They quit funding them when the Soviet Union collapsed. That’s when Russia became the real “enemy”.

[BroJoeK]

"Despite whatever pronouncements from 47 or Putin we hear, the war will continue unto Russia surrenders either militarily or from economic collapse."

Sadly, I agree with you 100%.
As in Russia's invasion of Afghanistan, which took them 10 years to withdraw from, that withdrawal did not begin until after the leading generation which launched the invasion had passed away.

I think Russians will wait until after Vlad the Invader departs this mortal realm before making any serious changes in their invasion of Ukraine.

[dennisw]

ping and I agree. US defense spending leads to US projection of power, leads to a stronger dollar, leads to the US Dollar being the words foremost reserve currency.

This reserve currency status allows us to print more money to keep everything (economies) humming here and abroad. Though there are limits to this scheme.

[BroJoeK]

Telepathic Intruder: "Let Europe worry then."

I certainly agree that it is long past time for the Euros to man-up, gear-up & step-up to lead their own national defense.

Consider:
In 1980, the US economy was double the size of China's & Russia's economies combined.
Today, China alone has double the manufacturing output of the US, and the China-Russia overall economies are now 50% larger than the US, measured by Purchase Price Parity (PPP).

So, the US absolutely cannot carry Europe's defense burden alone.
Those days are over.
The Euros must step up to defend themselves, without necessarily counting on Americans to always bail them out of trouble.

In a two or three front war, where China invades Taiwan, while Russia invades Ukraine or the Baltics, and Iran invades the Middle East, the US will be more dependent on our allies as the first lines of defense than ever before.

Check out this map of US allies & opponents.

US friends & allies (green), opponents (red) and uncertain (blue).
Map is not 100% accurate, i.e., Turkey is a NATO ally, Guiana is very friendly, South Africa is questionable:

[Telepathic Intruder]

Personally I would say to the leaders of Europe: “Until you can guarantee you citizens free speech and start enforcing your borders, there’s no point in our helping to defend you. Pay for NATO on your own”. As it is, they are inviting fascism in again after all the lives that were lost in WWII.

[icclearly]

The key point you need to grasp is that the US national debt -- some $37 trillion -- has nothing to do with defense spending.

What a ludicrous statement. I'm so happy you've been able to twist this like a pretzel to come up with that off-the-wall statement.

The fact is that we've probably spent $10 to $15 trillion or more on these crazy named wars. That's on top of the last five years alone, we've spent over $4 trillion on defense in the budget. So, if you total this back-of-the-envelope look, that's almost $20 trillion we've spent. That is more than the next nine highest countries COMBINED.

So, in your convoluted explanation, you're telling me straight away that if we removed that $20 trillion in spending, it would not reduce our overall budgetary spending and reduce the amount we need to borrow to pay the bill.

Now, in your simple mind, that may be true. But please don't insult the rest of us.

We might have been the world's savior at one time, but we're well past that point today. With current military spending, at a minimum, projected to be a trillion dollars a year and growing with our projected budget deficit to be two trillion please explain to me how we are going to continue to increase our ever growing debt WITHOUT haveing a significant impact on our economy -- in particular when the rest of the world views us as a bully and a much less safer place for them to put their money. Inquiring minds sure want to know.

It has everything to do with corruption in our political classes, especially Big Government, Big Spending Leftist Democrats

While there is no doubt about corruption, Elon Musk started out telling us he would cut two trillion, then a trillion, and the latest, before he walks out the door, it is $150 billion. So we assume he rooted out corruption, which is a rounding error, less than one percent of the national budget.

Direct military spending is almost 14% of our national budget and one of the largest single expenses in the budget, along with healthcare and social security (which will never be touched). Why are we spending more than the next nine countries combined -- especially when we don't have it to spend. It's fantasy.

National defense keeps the peace ("peace throuth strength") and peace is essential to everything else we do.

Oh sure. That's worked out really well for the last 60 years! Loses in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afganastain and now Ukraine.

That's the perfect example of stupid. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

That track record is one of disaster after disaster.

We are well past the time when we should worry about the rest of the world and not ourselves -- like most of the rest of the world.

You may want to worry about your neighbors' lives more than your own and especially if it is bankrupting us-- but I sure don't!

[icclearly]

Your PREMIERED video is cited from a very different source with similar name

Hi UMCRevMom, thanks for catching my error in confusing the MILITARY SUMMARY CHANNEL with the MILITARY SHOW CHANNEL.

My bad. The MILITARY SHOW CHANNEL is probably even more biased!

Asking me to listen to the first two minutes of that show is like asking you to listen to The Duran shows. What a joke.

[UMCRevMom@aol.com]

MILITARY SUMMARY CHANNEL
Country: Belarus
340K subscribers

This is the foolish propaganda site from Belarus

[BroJoeK]

Jan_Sobieski: "Read Anthony Sutton’s Wall Street Trilogy!
Great series on how the US Government, Big Banks, And Big business funded the Soviets the from the early 1900s on (he has the ledgers proving it).
They quit funding them when the Soviet Union collapsed.
That’s when Russia became the real “enemy”."

If you understand that US investments in, and trade support for, CCP China are in the many trillions of dollars since the 1990s, then by comparison, "Wall Street" investments in Soviet Russia after the 1917 Revolution amounted to only a few millions of dollars, in total, which in today's values is less that $1 billion.

One notable Russo-American that I remember as a young man was Armand Hammer.
His Occidental Petroleum and other companies helped him amass a fortune from dealings with the USSR, but it was hundreds of millions of dollars, not tens of trillions.

My point is only that while there were some "Wall Street" types investing in Soviet Russia after 1917, the scale was nowhere near the massive $trillions in investments made into CCP China by Americans since the 1990s.

But what can be measured in at least $hundreds of billions in today's money was the value of financial losses suffered by American and other investors in pre-Revolution Russia as a result of the Communists' default on Russia's debts and confiscations of Russia's industries.

By contrast, a few millions in "Wall Street's" post-Revolution Soviet investments were a mere drop in the financial bucket.

[BroJoeK]

Telepathic Intruder: "Personally I would say to the leaders of Europe: “Until you can guarantee you citizens free speech and start enforcing your borders, there’s no point in our helping to defend you.
Pay for NATO on your own”."

Indeed, that was somewhat the message delivered by VP Vance a few weeks ago, in Munich, Germany, and the Euros were not at all happy to hear it.
But I have heard Vance talk about it since then, making clear that he included the US itself in his criticisms -- i.e., the Biden administration's weaponization of government and censorship of free speech.

But while the Trump administration is consistent in insisting the Euros need to step up more for their own national defenses -- Trump says they should increase military spending to 5% of GDP -- outside that specific context, neither Trump nor anyone else in his administration has ever threatened to abandon NATO.

Telepathic Intruder: "As it is, they are inviting fascism in again after all the lives that were lost in WWII."

Sadly, words like "fascist", "nazi", "authoritarian", "dictator" & similar are all used so often & loosely these days that they've effectively lost all real meanings, beyond their value as insults and pejoratives.
Nobody today will admit to being another Mussolini, Franco or Hitler, much less Stalin or Mao, and all can point to distinctions between their parties and tyrants from history.

What nobody can deny are the levels of authoritarianism and bureaucratic oppression that inevitably grow over time in governments too long in power and too smug in their outlooks.
That's what Vance was talking about, imho.

2024 UK Southport Stabbing Riots:

[Telepathic Intruder]

Yes, no one calls themselves a “fascist” today because Hitler and Mussolini gave it a bad image. So now it’s used as a catch-all, mainly by libs, for everything they don’t like (including some aspects of democracy, which they claim to champion). But they don’t really know what it means anymore. I had the Vance speech in mind with my previous post, by the way. By the reaction of European leaders, he hit the mark.

[icclearly]

What??

My post was about the MILITARY SUMMARY CHANNEL, which is the source of the material that was linked to in the original comment.

https://freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/4315273/posts?page=113#113

Try again.

[bimboeruption]

>>>>This is the foolish propaganda site from Belarus<<<<

"Propaganda", "REVEREND"-mommy?

After 3+ years of thousands of posts sourced directly from the Ukrainian government, I'd say that's something you're an expert on.

[BroJoeK]

quoting BJK: "The key point you need to grasp is that the US national debt -- some $37 trillion -- has nothing to do with defense spending."

icclearly: "What a ludicrous statement.
I'm so happy you've been able to twist this like a pretzel to come up with that off-the-wall statement."

Yes, I understand that if you can't cope with actual facts it can be easy to descend into nonsense.
However, without facts, you have no argument, none.

Here is the key fact: despite spending several times more on national defense than we do today (as % of GDP) throughout the 30 years from 1945 through 1975, every year we reduced our national debt, and in total by about 75%, until national debt was a mere 30% of GDP.

Can you make that logical connection?
Today we spend barely 3% of GDP on national defense.
In those days we spent 10% and even 15% of GDP on defense, and yet... and yet... the national debt went down every year.

Why?

Because our government was less corrupt, less insane and less committed to our own self-destruction in those days.
In those days we had a consensus that national defense was necessary, that our enemies were truly evil and that we must prioritize national defense over other "nice to do" projects.

Today, both major parties can get very confused about what is essential to our survival and what unnecessary, corrupt and self-destructive.

icclearly: "The fact is that we've probably spent $10 to $15 trillion or more on these crazy named wars.
That's on top of the last five years alone, we've spent over $4 trillion on defense in the budget.
So, if you total this back-of-the-envelope look, that's almost $20 trillion we've spent.
That is more than the next nine highest countries COMBINED."

And still you ignore the facts that matter:

1. During the Korean War, the US spent the equivalent of $5 trillion per year on national defense, and yet our national debt went down every year.

2. During the Vietnam War, the US spent the equivalent of $3 trillion per year on national defense, and yet our national debt went down every year.

3. From 1953 through 1975, the US averaged the equivalent of over $2.5 trillion per year on national defense, and yet, our national debt went down every year as a percent of GDP.

4. Since 1975, and especially since 1991, US defense spending has been reduced from over $2.5 trillion to well under $1 trillion in today's GDP equivalents.

So, it was clearly not defense-spending which increased our national debt in the years since 1980, rather it was the explosion in other unnecessary and ultimately self destructive government spending.

icclearly: "So, in your convoluted explanation, you're telling me straight away that if we removed that $20 trillion in spending, it would not reduce our overall budgetary spending and reduce the amount we need to borrow to pay the bill."

Sure, and if you just stopped eating for a year, it would reduce your weight by at least 75%, but you'd also be dead.
So national defense for a country is equivalent to food for your body -- you certainly don't need too much, but you'll die with too little.
If necessary, you prioritize food and a country prioritizes national defense over everything else.

Since 1975, US national defense spending has been reduced by more than half and yet our debt has exploded from roughly 30% of GDP to now about 125% of GDP.
It was not because of increased national defense spending.

icclearly: "Now, in your simple mind, that may be true.
But please don't insult the rest of us."

I think anybody can easily see just who is intending to insult their intelligence.

icclearly: "We might have been the world's savior at one time, but we're well past that point today."

The United States remains the world's:

• #1 economy overall
• #1 financial sector
• #1 in economic self sufficiency
• #1 in technology & scientific research
• #1 military
• #1 in military alliances
• #1 in space exploration
• #1 in media & sports
• #3 largest area (#2 with Greenland ;-))
• #3 most populous (is China really #2?)
• lower ranked in several other criteria, though I think reporting on those could be highly biased, if not outright anti-American.

Point is, the US is far from helpless or unable to defend our national interests.

icclearly: "With current military spending, at a minimum, projected to be a trillion dollars a year and growing with our projected budget deficit to be two trillion please explain to me how we are going to continue to increase our ever growing debt WITHOUT haveing a significant impact on our economy "

Do you see your own argument?
Two trillion in projected deficits but only one trillion in military spending.
All of the two trillion comes from unnecessary waste, fraud and abusive government spending, or from improper funding of necessary programs.
Adequate military spending is a necessity, not an option, and must take first priority over everything else.

icclearly: "...in particular when the rest of the world views us as a bully and a much less safer place for them to put their money.
Inquiring minds sure want to know."

No country on Earth who feels threatened by China, Russia, Iran, North Korea or any of their authoritarian allies thinks of the US as a "bully".
Every country under threat from their neighbors thinks of the US as a safe-haven for their money and for retreat, should life grow unbearable in their own countries.

icclearly: "While there is no doubt about corruption, Elon Musk started out telling us he would cut two trillion, then a trillion, and the latest, before he walks out the door, it is $150 billion.
So we assume he rooted out corruption, which is a rounding error, less than one percent of the national budget."

Musk and D.O.G.E. are far from finished with their work on rooting out waste, fraud & abuse from Federal government.
$150 billion was just the easy stuff -- the low hanging fruit, so to speak.
The full $2 trillion will be much more difficult and will involve things like finding dead people collecting Social Security checks, illegal aliens on Medicare rolls, doctors overcharging for services and unemployed people working "off the books".

icclearly: "Direct military spending is almost 14% of our national budget and one of the largest single expenses in the budget, along with healthcare and social security (which will never be touched).
Why are we spending more than the next nine countries combined -- especially when we don't have it to spend.
It's fantasy."

In 1953, US defense spending took 74% of the Federal budget, and yet, somehow, our national debt was reduced as a percentage of GDP.

So, your whole argument is just nonsense.

icclearly: "Oh sure.
That's worked out really well for the last 60 years!
Loses in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afganastain and now Ukraine."

The period from 1945 through today is arguably the longest period of relative peace & prosperity in history.
Compare the financial cost of a major war like WWII, which in today's terms was around $37 trillion.
And consider that all of our conflicts since 1945 have opposed Soviet/Russian clients or proxies.
US opposition served to keep Russians & Chi-coms in check militarily.

icclearly: "That's the perfect example of stupid.
Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
That track record is one of disaster after disaster."

No, the track record is relative world peace and prosperity like never seen before in human history.

icclearly: "We are well past the time when we should worry about the rest of the world and not ourselves -- like most of the rest of the world.
You may want to worry about your neighbors' lives more than your own and especially if it is bankrupting us-- but I sure don't!"

There was never a time when the US government should have put any foreign interests ahead of US citizens.
But opposition to violent fascism, Nazism, Communism, Islamism, Russkiy Mir-ism and whatever other insane-isms are out there have always been in the best interests of US citizens, first & foremost.

Hiding our heads in the sand, Ostrich-like, will not make any international problems go away.

Those are facts.