You probably should note that Elon noted the…state actors impacting this propaganda via the note. You seem to accept your propaganda though, happily, so I am not sure that is an issue. No system is perfect, but I appreciate he and others (certainly not Teslag) looking for a free speech platform to best accommodate a 'dissenting voice' amid a world of war propaganda and lies in the media/online.
Now, I will await your imminent 'restatement' or snark lying about what was said/my opinions/statements/posts. Anyway…some updates:
JD Vance:
Nobody believes Ukraine can restore pre-war borders.
No money, war's gonna end soon:
Quote:
The Financial Times and the Michigan Ross business school, 48% of Americans said they believed their nation was spending too much on military and financial aid to Kiev. Only 27% said the amount was right, and 11% believed the US was not spending enough. The British newspaper reported the results on Sunday.
GOP voters were the most likely to say the US assistance to Ukraine was excessive, with 65% of Republicans giving that answer, compared to 52% of independents and 32% of Democrats.
The shifting attitudes were also reflected in a Pew survey on the same issue, the results of which the pollster released last Friday. In that study, 31% of respondents said the US was spending too much, compared to 29% who supported the current level, 18% who considered it not sufficient, and 22% who said they were not sure.
Interesting take from Simplicius:
Quote:
But the thing is, Russia has not launched any major decisive offensives to do that, other than Avdeevka. In every other area, they're still just doing a very methodical slow-grind of opportunistic advances. I.e. where they see a weak hole or flank, they'll attack it and take the position, but they won't do a brute force "all in" charge with massive losses like Ukraine did on their counteroffensive.
But to get back to just the Avdeevka comparison you invoked, the only difference is that Ukraine took hugely disproportionate casualties in their brute force head-on charge method. In Avdeevka, while Russian losses are relatively serious, they are still inflicting far more losses on the enemy while advancing compared to what Ukraine inflicted when they advanced in Zaporozhye.
And why is that? Mostly the usual: Russia has air superiority and is able to pound fixed AFU positions in Avdeevka with huge 500kg Fab-500 bombs 24/7, as well as nonstop rotary wing attacks. We've seen many videos of Ka-52s and Mi-28Ns launching TV-guided LMUR missiles precisely at AFU strongholds in Avdeevka. There's also a drone and artillery dominance.
Most importantly, since Avdeevka is a cauldron, the AFU positions are relatively fixed. Meaning, they aren't able to do a standard echelon defense fallback tactic as Russia used in Zaporozhye. There, Russia would strategically cede land as the AFU advanced, slowly goring them through the gauntlet, attriting AFU forces little by little as they slogged through each prepared echelon. It's like leading someone through a multi-stage trap very slowly while you comfortably back away.
In Avdeevka, the AFU doesn't have this option because there's no where to "retreat to" and no echelons to speak of, because they're sitting in an enclosed boiler and basically have to just dance around and hope Russia's firebag saturation doesn't exterminate them.
But even given those disadvantages, their defense has been remarkable. Unlike the hubristic pro-UA accounts who gloss over everything, we must admit that the Avdeevka defenders have shown remarkable ability to stymy Russian advances. Even given all the advantages, Russian forces are not able to consistently create breakthroughs and are often pushed out of positions just as quickly as they take them. For instance, days ago they made new advances in Stepove, but then were again booted out by a fierce Ukrainian counter attack.
Additionally, evidence continues to suggest Ukraine is still able to use the MSR supply route, which means Russia has still not fully clamped it down with firecontrol.
As a last note, the one thing I'll say Russia has been able to consistently achieve that Ukraine hasn't is the thing which has facilitated all of its dominance, from Avdeevka to Bakhmut and other fights. That is the ability to consistently create cauldrons. Even in all the brutal Zaporozhye assaults, the AFU was not able to create a single meaningful cauldron on Russian forces, despite trying very valiantly.
Small world, I had no idea Russia and the US use the same Austrian equipment to make artillery barrels:
Quote:
But everywhere else, due to the overreaching shell hunger Ukraine is currently experiencing, Russian forces are not having much problems with Ukrainian shelling. The biggest problem now that's getting worse by the day, is the FPV problem. The AFU has now been leaning more heavily on FPV usage and they continue to inflict major losses on Russia on every front with FPV drones. Keep in mind, Russia likewise inflicts even bigger losses on them with FPVs, however this still doesn't change the fact that FPVs are becoming an increasingly wider nightmare and the counters to them are struggling to keep up, as electronics units are not being rolled out quite as fast as needed to most units.
But stay tuned to this update also, as I am planning a much larger report in the near future on how drone warfare is evolving in the current battlefield.
As a quick note on barrels, check this guy's account and posts, as he had some goodthough pro-Western slantedinformation, like also this. Here he states that, interestingly, Russia and the U.S. both use the identical Austrian GFM forging machine to build their artillery barrels. In U.S.'s case, the Watervliet Arsenal factory in Watervliet, NY, and the Russian Motovilikha factory which produces their artillery barrels and MLRS equipment:
