Why don't they say the REAL reason behind that.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States aims to break the dynamic of grinding warfare and near-frozen front lines in Ukraine with newly announced military capabilities that it hopes will breath fresh momentum into Kyiv's battle against Russian forces, a senior Pentagon official said on Wednesday. But Colin Kahl, the Pentagon's top policy adviser, said the Pentagon still wasn't prepared to meet Kyiv's calls for gas-guzzling M1 Abrams main battle tanks. "I just don't think we're there yet," said Kahl, who had just returned from a trip to Ukraine. "The Abrams tank is a very complicated piece of equipment. It's expensive. It's hard to train on. It has a jet engine."
I don't know what was taught to this mysterious "senior Pentagon official", but it looks like he slept at all of his lectures in US Army War College on armored warfare and operational art. Granted this "senior official" is real and is not pulled out of the ass of some BSer from Reuters, who reported on that. But then, again, in the military culture where big mouth Patton is considered a tank genius while never facing in his life people the scale of Guderian, Mainstein, Model or Hoth, or, for that matter, Katukov or Rybalko, let alone Rokossovsky or Konev, who were way above Patton's rank and pay grade, but... sure--Strykers are going to do well against T-72B3s, let alone T-90Ms, not to speak of Russia's SMART munitions, right? If this anonymous "senior official" thinks so, then I am not surprised with Pentagon's "stellar" record of wars from Vietnam, to Iraq and Afghanistan.
As Larry, very reasonably, assumed yesterday:
Helmholtz Smith today reinforces this point and goes even further:
Here’s what the Western MSM hasn’t told you. The Russian Armed Forces as such haven’t been much involved so far. Airborne at the beginning, some fast air and rotary wing, a lot of artillery throughout. But the big fighting has been done by the LDPR militias everywhere, Wagner at Bakhmut defense complex, Chechens in Mariupol. The big shoe hasn’t dropped. The Russian Armed Forces proper have 200,000 to 500,000 troops armed trained and equipped (lots of tanks – the latest T-90s are showing up). Will they complacently sit there watching Ukraine and NATO “demilitarize” themselves? Or is a “big arrow” offensive coming? It’s Moscow’s choice. The optimist can hope that the announcements of wonderwaffe that haven’t actually got to Ukraine are the exculpation that “we did everything we could” before the lift-off from Kabul Airport West. The pessimist can fear that NATO, when it finally gets to the bottom of the barrel and has cut its arms and legs off, will use the last weapon it has.
For pessimistic scenario, it seems, by the mood of Putin, Shoigu and Lavrov, not to mention Patrushev and Medvedev, all necessary messages re: the outcome for the US in case some will decide to go rogue, have been conveyed, including explanation of this ABM balance of power, especially against the background of Russian ABM capabilities which the US simply doesn't have. And that means a survival of enough professional Russians who will hunt down those who issued the "order" in the rubble of what will be left of the US. But, I think, the situation is closer to exculpation scenario. Plus, judging by intensity with which DNC and their whores in media begin to sink Biden, even they have had enough. Tucker seems to think so.
So, the events must run the course. But it is already clear that by failing to achieve any sensible political objectives in Ukraine and in Russia, and, by this, starting a massive global re-alignment, the United States sustained a defeat. What will be the consequences of this defeat? I hate to speculate, I just know that they are already big and that the moment of facing the reality is coming.
I warned that Russians are very wrong people to fuck with when it comes to war and survival of the nation--this is more than millennium of conditioning by non-stop wars. It is genetic and they don't teach it in the Western universities. Certainly not in the International Relations departments in Ivy League schools for good ol' boys and girls, not that there are qualified people to teach the real foreign policy there, anyway.