Putin’s embarrassing one-tank parade hints at catastrophic losses in Ukraine

Atlantic Council ^ | 9th May 2023 | Peter Dickinson

[Cronos]

It would be hard to image a more fitting symbol of Russia’s declining military fortunes than the sight of a solitary Stalin-era tank trundling across Red Square during the country’s traditional Victory Day celebrations on May 9. For the past two decades, Vladimir Putin has used Victory Day to showcase modern Russia’s resurgence as a military superpower, with dozens of the very latest tanks typically taking part in each annual parade. This year, however, the only tank on display was a T-34 model dating back to World War II.

Inevitably, the embarrassing absence of tanks at this year’s Victory Day parade has been widely interpreted as further evidence of Russia’s catastrophic losses in Ukraine. Social media was soon buzzing with posts poking fun at the Kremlin. “Modern Russian military equipment can be found much more easily at Ukrainian military trophy exhibitions than at the Victory Parade in Moscow,” noted the Ukrainian Defense Ministry’s official Twitter account. Others were less subtle. “There was one tank at the parade in Moscow! We laugh all over Ukraine,” posted Ukrainian MP Oleksiy Goncharenko. “There are farmers in Ukraine with more tanks than that,” quipped another Twitter user.

Tuesday’s one-tank parade was the latest in a series of blows that had already cast a shadow over preparations for this year’s Victory Day celebrations. In the month preceding the holiday, more than twenty cities across Russia canceled plans to hold military parades. While security concerns were officially cited, these cancellations fueled speculation that Russia simply doesn’t have enough military equipment available to stage regional parades, with the vast majority of tanks and other vehicles having already been sent to Ukraine.

[alexander_busek]

You are engaging in cat-and-mouse tactics, Rocco DiPippo.

You presented one argument ("Russia is a 3rd-World country, a mere shadow of the former Soviet Union; Russia thus poses no military threat to the West!"), I then proceed to eviscerate your "logic," and then you respond by... Posing a new argument.

You should at least first do the honorable thing and admit that your initial argument was based on faulty logic and defective facts, that I effectively refuted it (or, conversely, you can punch holes in my refutation of your initial argument) - and only then introduce a completely different line of reasoning!

Regards,

[Mr. K]

The biden-fluffers here are unable to logically debate their position, so they switch to a new argument.

[alexander_busek]

What concerns me more is the expected invasion on our southern border. For that I'd be willing to see our military somehow put a stop to it.

I have the same stance, jmacusa.

But protecting our southern border isn't competing with, e.g., imposing sanctions on Russia or aiding Ukraine (insisting that it does would be a blatant instance of the False Dilemma Fallacy)

The "price-tag" for protecting our southern border would be effectively nil - i.e., we only need to enforce current laws, maybe spend a few more bucks for instant deportation, but the savings (in contrast to allowing the illegal invaders into our country, "hosting" them, letting them suck at the govt. teat, and allowing them to commit further crimes) would be very quickly noticeable.

Protecting our southern border would be cost-neutral - but probably actually result in a net positive effect!

Thus, protecting our southern border is NOT in competition with ensuring that Putin fails.

Regards,

[BroJoeK]

Rocco DiPippo: "US out of Ukraine, period, end of story."

The US is not "in" Ukraine in the same sense that the Old Soviets were not "in" the Korean or Vietnam wars.
Officially, Soviets supplied equipment only to the Communist forces fighting against Americans.

Rocco DiPippo: "Not one more penny for that craphole and its corrupt, grifting Globalist puppet.
No more spook-directed foreign entanglements and "adventures" that end up enriching the few, killing young men, and fleecing the US taxpayer."

On an index of 180 nations' corruption,

1. Denmark ranks #1, meaning least corrupt.
2. United States ranks #24, slightly less than Taiwan, but slightly more corrupt than Canada, Japan, the UK & France.
3. Ukraine ranks #116, about the same as Algeria and Angola
4. Russia ranks #134, slightly more corrupt than Egypt, but slightly less than Pakistan and Uganda.

You arguments might be correct, if we were talking about, for examples, Armenia vs. Azerbaijan, small, obscure countries, where we are relatively indifferent to the outcome of their border disputes, and only really care about keeping the peace.

But Russia and Ukraine are neither small nor obscure.
They are the numbers one and two in Europe by size, numbers one and six by population, numbers two and ten economically.
Militarily, Russia was considered the world's second strongest, and still first in nuclear weapons.

More important, Russia is the world's greatest revisionist country, it's biggest bully, having invaded or threatened more of it's neighbors than any other country, including China:

1. Azerbaijan (1990–1994);[1][2]
2. Moldova (1992–present);
3. Georgia (2004–present);
4. Lithuania (2006);
5. Estonia (2006–2007);
6. Poland (2006–present);
7. Belarus (2007);
8. Ukraine (2014–present);
9. Syria (2015–present);
10. Turkey (2015–2016);
11. Kazakhstan (2021–2022);[3] and
12. Armenia (2022)[4] amongst others.[5]

My point is, Russia today is just as bullying, belicose, belligerent and dangerous as was the Old Soviet Union, which the United States devoted huge military resources over many decades under the doctrine of "containment".

Rocco DiPippo: "America is currently a complete mess and fading fast.
That's where American resources and focus must be right now."

That is a totally 100% bogus argument because:

1. 100% of our problems today are the result of deliberate radical Democrat policies, not a shortage of money.
   All the money in the world will not help us so long as Democrats are in charge politically.

2. Once responsible Republican government is restored, there will be plenty of money to solve our most serious problems (i.e., the borders), restore our own military and provide aid and comfort to small countries fighting off invasions from aggressor nations like Russia and China.

3. Depriving Ukraine of aid will not help defeat Democrats politically.

4. Supplying Ukraine is not depleting critical weapons stocks, but it is ramping up our capacity, and our allies' capacities, to produce higher volumes of modern weapons.

Rocco DiPippo: "The greatest threat to the West, and specifically America, isn't Russia and it isn't China.
It is a relatively small group of leftist/globalist scumbags and nasty ideologues intent on burning the traditional West to the ground and replacing it with a world-wide, totalitarian government run by the few, for the few."

However true that is, or is not, it's irrelevant to our supplying aid to Ukraine.
Yes, we do have a political problem which will only be solved when we can convince enough of our friends and neighbors to vote Democrats out of office.
But Ukraine has nothing to do with that.

Rocco DiPippo: "I don't give a crap about two messed up countries filled with people even more non-virtuous and dysfunctional than Americans are who are duking it out over what is at its core a border dispute, one that's been going on, in various forms, for many decades."

Sorry, but that is an outright lie, it's not a "border dispute" because Russia officially recognized Ukraine's borders, including Crimea, many times:

1. 1954 Soviet transfer of Crimea to Ukraine (Khruschev)
2. 1991 Belovezha Accords (Yeltsin, Kravchuk)
3. 1994 Budapest Memorandum (Yeltsin, Clinton, Kravchuk)
4. 1997 Russia-Ukraine Friendship Treaty (Yeltsin, Kuchma)
5. 2003 Russia Ukraine border treaty (Putin, Kuchma)

So there is no "border dispute", rather it is simply Russia being Russia and invading its weaker neighbors.

[alexander_busek]

100% of our problems today are the result of deliberate radical Democrat policies, not a shortage of money. All the money in the world will not help us so long as Democrats are in charge politically.

You hit it right out of the ballpark, BroJoeK!

Regards,

[BroJoeK]

"The biden-fluffers here are unable to logically debate their position..."

Setting aside ridiculous name-calling, I've never seen a "biden-fluffer" or "Putin-pat-er" on Free Republic.

As for logic, that's as simple as simple can get: it's vastly cheaper in American blood and treasure to help Ukrainians defeat Vlad the Invader in Ukraine, than it will be to fight & defeat the Russians ourselves, after they've annexed Ukraine and begin to invade their next victims.

What's not logical about that?

[Rocco DiPippo]

Never said "Russia is a 3rd- World Country." And please, don't accuse me of being dishonorable. What is truly dishonorable on the Youcrayne/Ruzziiiaa threads are all the bloodthirsty Youcrayne cheerleaders who seem to be itching for deeper US involvement in that conflict, but have no "skin in the game," so to speak. I care for. . . I feel bad for . . I pray for etc; all that unctuous, BS virtue signaling does not a single, effing thing to help alleviate the pain and suffering of those over there.

If Youcrayne means so damn much to you; if an extreme, long-term hatred of Ruzzziiiaaa consumes you (and I believe that in your case it does), then get your ass on a plane and go fight for your country; Youcrayne. If you're too cowardly to do that, then at least go over there as a humanitarian volunteer.

To that end, here's how I'll help you make that happen: 1) I will steer you towards a portal where you can sign up to the join the battle and/or help out in some capacity over there. 2) I will give you a Zoom meeting concentrating on pointers (from my years of working in combat zones) on staying in one piece, but I really do recommend you get at least a few weeks of intense weapons and tactical training before you go - there are several excellent choices for that - ask around or I can recommend some.

Let me know when you or, for that matter, any FR Youkazoid's ready to actually throw down for their country of Youcrayne and I'll do what I can to help make that happen.

In fact, depending on my finances at the time you're ready to go I might be able to help chip in to help with your airfare and travel costs there.

Put your money where your mouth is, and get the process started now. It is time for you - and other FR Youkazoids - to go fight for Youcrayne against Ruzzziiiaaa. Two week weapons training included, you could be over there and in the thick of it within a few months if you commit to the gig now. Just do it, man! It will be the experience of a lifetime - if you survive it and yes, at the end of the day, if properly trained the odds of survival without physical injury will definitely be in your favor. Why should some American kid who doesn't give a damn about Youcrayne end up being killed over there at some point when there are plenty of Youcrayne cheerleaders who should be gladly willing to go fight instead?

[Rocco DiPippo]

[alexander_busek]

Never said "Russia is a 3rd- World Country."

Your exact words were:

There is little resemblance between that monstrosity and modern Russia, which is by any measure a barely- First World nation with severe economic and social issues and a military vastly degraded in comparison with the Soviet Union at the height of its military power in the mid 60s to the mid 70s.

I leave it to the other fine ladies and gentlemen here at of Free Republic to decide if I paraphrased you unfairly.

And please, don't accuse me of being dishonorable.

I never accused you of being dishonorable. Rather, I said that you should "do the honorable thing and admit..." I was thus rather encouraging you to be honorable. That is hardly the same thing!

What is truly dishonorable on the Youcrayne/Ruzziiiaa threads are all the bloodthirsty Youcrayne cheerleaders who seem to be itching for deeper US involvement in that conflict [...]

I have encountered ZERO FReepers here who have advocated a "deeper U.S. involvement." I have yet to encounter a single FReeper who has, e.g., advocated sending U.S. troops.

I certainly haven't - so please stop "Strawmanning" me!

If Youcrayne means so damn much to you; if an extreme, long-term hatred of Ruzzziiiaaa consumes you (and I believe that in your case it does), then get your ass on a plane and go fight for your country; Youcrayne. If you're too cowardly to do that, then at least go over there as a humanitarian volunteer.

You have no idea to what extent I am already providing material support to Ukraine and working with actual Ukrainians - so please spare us your mouth-frothing rants.

Regards,

[wardaddy]

I’m saying it’s not first time they’ve used minimal stuff in parade
You can google it

[Rocco DiPippo]

“Barely a First World country” can in no way be construed as meaning Third World country. I’m not interested in a point by point addressing of your turgid, long-winded, Soros-like circular scribblings. My offer remains open. Are you interested in going to fight for your country Youcrayne or not?

[Rocco DiPippo]

. . . .except for the insane trillions in debt that will accelerate the destruction that’s already in play.

[Rocco DiPippo]

"You have no idea to what extent I am already providing material support to Ukraine and working with actual Ukrainians - so please spare us your mouth-frothing rants."

So, are you giving "material support" to Youcrayne? If so, what is the nature of it?

Why not instead throw that support/cash to AMERICAN wounded warriors and not to people in a horribly corrupt country who care about America and Americans only insofar as how much they can shake bling and favors from them. That's the Eastern European way. . . Here, make a donation right now. Thank you.

Donate to Wounded AMERICAN warriors. Spend money you might be throwing at Youcraynian grifters to support our injured folks instead. Click this link to go to the Wounded Warriors donation page. Thank you!

Hey, everyone, just do it.

[alexander_busek]

Why not instead throw that support/cash to AMERICAN wounded warriors and not to [...]

False Dilemma Fallacy

Regards,

[Rocco DiPippo]

Oh yes! You consider yourself a real intellectual, a professional rhetoritician, yo! Were you/are you a teacher in real life? I have always had an aversion to that classic teacher pomposity, condescension and know-it-all drift. Yuck.

So, will you donate to American wounded warriors instead of Youcraynian interests?

Have you decided to accept or reject my offer to help facilitate your trip to Youcrayne so you can fight for Youcrayne?

The offer will remain open until the war over there ends. Contact me via private email and we'll get the ball rolling if you have the balls and honesty to.

[BroJoeK]

"Americans First"

"Americans First" does not mean throwing unlimited money at homeless.
That's because the problem with homeless is not money.
We already spend or waste trillions of dollars on various social welfare programs and in many cases the money only makes the problem worse.

That's because in most cases the real problem of the homeless is physical and/or mental illness and/or drug addictions.
So, it doesn't matter how much money you throw at such people, until their real problems are addressed and treated effectively, nothing will improve.

In the meantime, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a matter challenging the current American led global order and threatening to return us to the era of military empire builders and "might makes right" ethics.
Two world wars were fought to destroy those ideals, and now you want to let them back without a fight?

Oh?? What's that?? You say you hate the global order?
You hate American leadership? You don't want to see Americans try to keep the world at peace?
You want to see some other countries do the job for us?
You like the Chi-Coms? You like Vlad the Invader?
You want to put them in charge?
You want to bend the knee to Vlad?
You want to KOWTOW to the Xi-snake?

Really?
I doubt it.
I don't think you've thought this through at all.

But hopefully most people are more far-sighted than you, FRiend.

[antceecee]

Yup! We are all screwed over ‘Bigly’.

[alexander_busek]

In the meantime, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a matter challenging the current American-led global order and threatening to return us to the era of military empire builders and "might makes right" ethics.

I have rarely encountered such clarity of thought and elegance of expression in a Free Republic posting!

Keep up the good work!

Regards,

[Rocco DiPippo]

"Americans First" does not mean throwing unlimited money at homeless. That's because the problem with homeless is not money. We already spend or waste trillions of dollars on various social welfare programs and in many cases the money only makes the problem worse. That's because in most cases the real problem of the homeless is physical and/or mental illness and/or drug addictions. So, it doesn't matter how much money you throw at such people, until their real problems are addressed and treated effectively, nothing will improve.

I'm not proposing that money be mindlessly thrown at homeless people and yes, of course I understand why most homeless folks are homeless. No, what I'm saying is that the $100 billion thrown at Youcrayne absolutely could be used to get our homeless soldiers off the streets and get them the help they need. Shelters and halfway houses, only for vets. Substance abuse and mental health centers, only for vets. For $100 billion homeless vet facilities could be built in every major city and large town in America. I'm damn sure that finding volunteers to work at these shelters wouldn't be difficult. Even if just half of our homeless vets' lives were improved because of such efforts it would be a great thing.

America sent men to the moon. We could do this, for sure. We owe it to our veterans, especially the ones who got messed up in combat situations.

[BroJoeK]

Rocco DiPippo: "what I'm saying is that the $100 billion thrown at Youcrayne absolutely could be used to get our homeless soldiers off the streets and get them the help they need.
Shelters and halfway houses, only for vets. Substance abuse and mental health centers, only for vets.
For $100 billion homeless vet facilities could be built in every major city and large town in America."

You still don't "get" it?
Let me say it again v-e-r-y * s-l-o-w-l-y.

Our Democrat administration is literally p*issing away $trillions -- not $millions, not even $billions, $trillions -- on insane vote buying schemes.
In their account books, $100 billion is just a rounding error, it's the pocket change at the back of your couch.
So money is not the issue.

The real issue with our homeless, or border, our cities, anything, you name it, is not money!.
The real issue is always Democrat policies, which by design are intended to make whatever perceived problem we have much worse.

You wonder why?
It's because they hate us, they hate Americans and America.
They want to reduce us to a level where they can rule over us, "Democratically", meaning, the same way "Democrats" rule over the "Democratic People's Republic of North Korea".

Democrats could solve the homeless problem tomorrow, if they wanted to, but they don't because the homeless are very useful advertisements for higher taxes and more government control.
The homeless also drive away potential Republican voters, thus insuring Democrats eternal political power.

And that's what it's all about.

In the meantime, the last time we saw the genuine heroism of Ukrainians defending against Russian invaders -- ORCS -- was those firemen climbing steps in the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001.

They deserve all the support we can give them.