Here we see the mind of the neophyte who doesn't understand anything about the military, military history or usages.
His mind IMMEDIATELY goes to a non-peer war to make a faulty analogy about the current conflict.
We're observing a peer-to-peer war in The Ukraine, where the PEER adversaries are slugging it out like an Irish stand-down. Only Russia has an 8 to 1 advantage in artillery, and has totally degraded the Ukrainian air defense system.
His denial only allows him to see the rice paddies of East Asia, though.
We're observing a peer-to-peer war in The Ukraine, where the PEER adversaries are slugging it out like an Irish stand-down. Only Russia has an 8 to 1 advantage in artillery, and has totally degraded the Ukrainian air defense system.
If Russia still possesses an 8-1 advantage, why do you consider Ukraine their peer? Shouldn't the side with 8x the artillery be considerably superior to the side that has only 1/8th the artillery?
Why, with this presumed enormous artillery advantage, did the Russians find themselves forced back from Nikolaev into a "futile" position in Kherson where they were forced to flee across the river?
How bad does the Russian army suck to possess an 8-1 advantage in artillery and still get forced into retreat after retreat by the foe you started the war with?
Why do you think that is happening to the Russian forces if they possess this massive superiority in arms? Are they not even 1/8th as competent as the Ukrainians? What's the reason for their repeated reversals and retreats from "futile" fighting positions in Ukraine? How do you explain it to yourself?