Bernhard Did An Excellent Write-up.

On this whole situation with VSU's "victories" and how Western media are beginning to recognize a horrendous truth (for them) behind demolishing of VSU, which at this stage is literally being pummeled into utter submission. Bernhard discusses fighting doctrines of Russia and NATO and notes (correctly):

'Western' doctrine, which is essentially U.S. doctrine, is betting on air supremacy. The enemy's air defenses get destroyed in first few days of the war. After that enemy formations get wiped out by applying a huge amount of aerial bombing against them. Russian doctrine never has believed in air supremacy. Russia itself has excellent air defenses so it knows what it is talking about. To destroy enemy formations Russia applies artillery, lots of it.

He also compares combat organization of the main fighting units of Russian and US armies and, again correctly, arrives to the state-of-the-affairs for VSU. 

Unless the defending forces are fully under armor or extremely well dug in, as they had been for eight years at the Donetsk frontline, they have no hope to hold out against Russian artillery. Since the Russian army broke through the immediate frontline the Ukrainians have lost the protection of fortified dugouts and are on the run.  None of the above is new and it was the reason why I and other could easily predicted that the Ukrainian army would lose the war.

Read the whole thing, it is an excellent write up from Moon of Alabama. 

In related news, as was anticipated, the US decided not to play with fire and the danger of own annihilation and stopped any silly talks about sending HIMARS to 404 and it is all for the better. The US still wants to send some kind of MLRS (maybe even same HIMARS) but with much shorter range munitions. As Dmitry Medvedev noted today: 

«Разумно. Иначе при атаке на наши города Вооруженные силы России исполнили бы свою угрозу и нанесли удары по центрам принятия этих преступных решений. Часть из них находится совсем не в Киеве. Что дальше – объяснять не надо»

Translation: Makes sense. Otherwise, upon attacks on our cities, Russia's Armed Forces would have delivered on their threat to strike these criminal decision making centers. Part of those centers is located absolutely not in Kiev. What would follow--no explanation is needed. 

So, there you go. Meanwhile VSU continues to do what it was doing for the last 8 years--using civilians as human shield an shelling civilian areas of liberated cities and towns in Donbass. In other news, Denmark and Netherlands decided not to pay for Russian gas in Rubles. Sure, no problem.

The threat of cutting off gas supplies, if not being paid in Rubles, is taking another casualty. Russian gas giant Gazprom has announced that it will stop gas supplies to the Netherlands by Wednesday, in a reaction to the refusal by Dutch energy trader GasTerra to pay in rubles.

Evidently, the concept of money and paying for goods and services is still not developed in these two nations at this stage of their historic development, but, I think, in a few centuries they may figure this principle out and whatever will be left of them will join the family of civilized nations. Same goes for the present CIA big honcho William Burns (the US so called "diplomat"), who tries to wax Russia "insiderish" but fails miserably due to an extremely low professionalism of the current US "diplomacy" and "foreign service", so, he triers himself as Putinologist--a euphemism for ignorant US "diplomats" who, as it is normal now, know nothing about Russia. Even after being ambassador to Russia as Burns did.  So, he states:

Half of Washington, D.C., is in the business of analyzing Vladimir Putin’s every word and move these days. But when CIA Director William Burns speaks of the Russian leader, an autocrat waging a brutal war on Ukraine, his words carry unusual weight. Putin is the epitome of a “peculiarly Russian combination of qualities”: “cocky, cranky, aggrieved and insecure,” Burns has written. The Kremlin chief is “an apostle of payback,” Burns has declared.

But even this sophomoric "journalism" from Politico notes:

Burns may be a good Putinologist, but even he didn’t predict how much the Russian leader would scramble the Biden administration’s foreign policy agenda.

I have news for these US "diplomats" and "journos"--there are NO real "Putinologists", let alone good level specialists on Russia, anywhere in D.C. Because there is no US diplomacy as art and as noble profession in principle. Most what US foreign policy establishment, including its "elite" schools produces as its "diplomats" is a grey mass of under-educated ignoramuses who learn absolutely nothing about outside world and the same goes pretty much to any institution in D.C., including CIA. Burns is not an exception. 

It is the clock-work of the US "elite" education and selection mechanism which is completely broken and, as a result, produces people who are utterly unqualified to carry out any tasks related to any actual governance, be it in political, economic, diplomatic or military spheres. So, whenever the phrase such as "but even he" is used nowadays I always smile, "even they" in D.C. drove the United States to the precipice due to their corruption, careerism and lack of any professionalism. May be they should stop trying to be "Putinologists" and concentrate on their immediate professional responsibilities, instead of spewing PR BS through media which are as ignorant and amoral as they are. Nah, not gonna happen...