Why are RUSSIAN ARMS failing SO BADLY? - VisualPolitik EN

Thanks to Masterworks for sponsoring today's video! Go to masterworks.art/visualpolitik and skip the waitlist to join Masterworks! See important Regulation A disclosures and the offering circular at masterworks.io/about/disclosure
The Russian invasion of Ukraine has made a fool of the Soviet military industry. Since 2008, Vladimir Putin has launched a military renewal program with the idea of bringing the Russian military into the 21st century. After years of ineffective Soviet management, Putin had inherited a completely obsolete military arsenal. However, it seemed that the Kremlin was willing to put all its resources into strengthening its military muscle.
During the last few years, Russia has been showing off its new weapons to the whole world: the new Sukhoi Su-34, armata tanks and KALIBR precision missiles. All military analysts thought that the Russian army was a well-armed force, capable of taking on almost any other army (with the exception of the US army).
However, the invasion of Ukraine has revealed that Russia has a serious problem with its military industry. Most of the weapons being used fall far short of the expectations we all had: including the Russians. The question is: How is it possible that Putin's efforts have not helped to modernize its military arsenal? What exactly is wrong with the Russian military industrial complex? In this video we explain.
*Script written in collaboration with Willy Pulido
Join the VisualPolitik community and support us on Patreon: / visualpolitik

[@VisualPolitikEN]

Go to masterworks.art/visualpolitik and skip the waitlist to join Masterworks! See important Regulation A disclosures and the offering circular at masterworks.io/about/disclosure

[@dopplerhit8374]

Yooo

[@Kenneth_James]

Expired MREs and food are not a big deal in the military. Even the US has expired MRE's. They can last for 40 years. Your looking at it as a normal consumer. What is inside of them and the fact that now Ukraine has them is far more important.

[@celavisadave]

Think it was the late John McCain

[@kungfujoe2136]

SAIS WHO? what is the 1st victim of war? the truth

[@alicaljungberg3742]

Man, this was one shitty video. Full of assumptions and unproven claims unverified by neutral sources.

[@marilenaganea6578]

Someone said once: Russia is parading as a superpower while being just a gas station with nukes

[@garypatrick7817]

I said that…!

[@kineticstar]

Very apt statement seeing current events.

[@marilenaganea6578]

@@kineticstar indeed

[@ultimatethoughts.]

ya,and everyone need gas 😀

[@marilenaganea6578]

@Augusto Pinochet unfortunately they still have their sellouts and servants around the world, some of them in power in other countries, that will try to break sanctions to save Putin's arse. Hungary is to watch carefully, if Madame le pen wins in French elections she will try to pay back for Putin's support, China are still on the fence thinking if buying Russia at fire sale price worth it... Etc

[@DemoEvolvedGaming]

The real problem with Russian logistics is that many billions have been siphoned off from military budgets to fund yachts and lifestyle. Pro tip: you can’t actually siphon that much and still have quality results in your actual produced goods.

[@kev792]

Nailed it 👍🏾. This is also what happened with a lot of the food, bullets, medical, gas, and other items. A lot of the officers, generals, and commanders were corrupt and sold a lot of this stuff off to pad their pockets. Now it’s costing them in the war.

[@SurzhenkoAndrii]

This is not problem.

[@ebrim5013]

Especially when you’re not even a rich country.

[@freetolook3727]

It'd be a real shame if those super yachts got sunk.

[@MrDanisve]

@John Osman Indeed, Russia says it spends 5% on defense. But fact is like only 2.5% make it too the "defense" rest gets leeched off in that corrupt system. Corruption is very unefficient. And if you have an adversary with less corruption. You are at an disadvantage (Not that US lacks corruption itself, its not this huge) Russia is against adversaries with less corruption, and way more numerous. So if Russia would be to stand a chance at all. Russia would have to be less corrupt than the west. So it can be as efficient as possible. But that wont happen untill they get a proper democracy.

[@rogerwilco2]

2% of German GDP is twice that of 5% of Russian GDP, despite only having half the population and much fewer natural resources. Russia is just severely underperforming because of its leaders.

[@audience7264]

Its the corruption. From the very top on down, everyone lining their pockets with the resources of the land & the work of the people.

[@markbrisec3972]

I've been saying it for years, and therefore been a target of Russian fanboys and trolls (by the way where are all of them), that Russia is a gas station with nuclear weapons.. In all reality you can't be considered a superpower when having an economy the size of Italy or Texas. No way.. Also, you can't have a massive nuclear force, new submarines, thousands of tanks and a wannabe air force, all on a 60 billion$ budget. Again, no way, even if we recognize the fact that they benefit from a cheap labor. They were always great at selling the picture of a powerful military while being a 3rd grade conventional military force.

[@douglasturner6153]

Because of it's leaders! And the whole culture of hopelessness built into the minds of the population. Really talented and independent minded people are viewed as a danger by the Kleptocracy Elites controlling Russia.

[@ricecakeboii94]

You talk so high & mighty about this German GDP but when it came to paying their fair share for NATO defenses Germany only pay less than half. When it came to sanctions Germany still haven’t halted Russian oil. Tell your leaders to get their shit together cause to me (an American) both Russian & German leadership are 🤡

[@paulbedichek2679]

Germany has vastly underperformed and largely crated Putins Russia, because of poor leadership and worse citizens.

[@alexeyeglazov]

I am a software developer. I was born in Moscow and I have been working here for more than 20 years. I worked for many companies here - one swedish, one french, many russian ones. Also I worked for one state's company that was managed by former military officers. They did not work at all. They only simulated activity and result. Once I came to my bosses and told about some bugs and defects in our product. They told me with calm polite voice: "Dear Alexey we do not need thees improvements. We need good reports about results. Please write the reports. More paper - cleaner the asshole". This hardly working project was approved by men from Ministry of Education and Science and was never used.

[@passais]

😂 More paper - cleaner the asshole.

[@barbaraGobert31]

interesting.

[@grimgoreironhide9985]

And these same former military officers of the Soviet or Russian armed forces are now wondering why they technologically behind. Russia had a real chance of actually being on par with the US in terms of military and civil technology but this corrupt mindset destroyed Russia.

[@alexeyeglazov]

@@grimgoreironhide9985 You are right. But I must say one thing. Soviet Union was very good in mathematics, nearly the best in the world. The state needed to develope industry and supported scince. Also mathematicions do not depend on stupid ideology and on State. Even poor man can buy books, table, paper and pencil and be good in math. The same is in software development. It is good in Russia now. Every one can study computer scince and technologies. There is a great demand on it in banking, trading, customer services. We have created a lot of good products. The secret is "no russian state - no problem"

[@worldvibeweb8196]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/i5rSlHdqgtSohNE

[@williamlloyd3769]

It was interesting to see Ukrainian disassembling a Russian drone. Engine was manufactured by Honda. Sensor was a Japanese Cannon DSLR camera. Other electronics were from Taiwan. Very few parts were Russian in origin.

[@kineticstar]

If you can't make it fake it! - Russian proverb

[@apfelschorle1988]

Tbh if it's cheap and does the job I see no problem here. It's a simple drone to spy on enemy locations.

[@presidentluigi7174]

@@apfelschorle1988 You see, they can't get the parts because of sanctions but if they were russian made, they could still be produced

[@TOFKAS01]

@@presidentluigi7174 Well, putting together other peoples manufactured parts is not a great thing. It just shows that you cant do it yourself. And modern drones should do more than just being a flying camera...

[@alibaban09]

well, you believe ukraine propaganda without turning on your brain - or why would russia use a 500-700usd camera in a drone, while a drone from china cost only 100usd doesnt make sence, does it?

[@alantoon5708]

Corruption at all levels is absorbing many Russian defense dollars...

[@joh22293]

It's impossible to have that many superyachts in any normal society unless the entire country was setup to feed money to Putin and his pals. And I've just read that there are 370 yachts classed as 'super' with Russian ownership, also, 'the bigger the yacht, the more likely it is to be owned by a Russian" XD

[@Yuki_Ika7]

i saw on reddit that some russian tnt explosive was opened up from it's casing and inside was a fucking block of wood, i am not joking!!!!

[@eVill420]

and it's not cheap to maintain so much equipment that Russia has, no doubt acquiring new toys was greatly compromised

[@benghazi4216]

@@eVill420 But we now know Russia doesn't do maintenance either. The problem is that corruption is everywhere, on every level.

[@whattwowhat]

@@Yuki_Ika7 holy hell, I just looked for it using "tnt wood russia" and there it is.

[@dragongrazer7620]

There is a reason for Russian special forces learning to fight with shovels, it is their most reliable piece of weaponry.

[@swedsteve93]

Not when the soil betrays them by being radioactive

[@williamwilson6499]

No technologically advanced weapon is worth a damn without a well trained operator.

[@bighands69]

Military culture cannot just be introduced on a whim and has to take generations to develop.

[@vihtoripuurola3775]

SOF Truths.

[@littledikkins2253]

@@vihtoripuurola3775 They train their conscripts for 3 months, if that.

[@TeaParty1776]

@@littledikkins2253 And they are brutalized.

[@vietanhtran3363]

They invest 7% of their GDP into defense, but 6.5% is stolen by oligarchs😂

[@HinduPAGANcowpissdrinkerRAKESH]

Your country is corrupt too lol

[@Summer_Sausage]

7% is still only 120 billion too😂 broke boys

[@cronostvg]

Since oligarchs were not executed, Russian accpects the following split. 0.5% GDP for defense. 6.5% GDP for administration. Another way of seeing it is every 12 work hours, produces an hour of product. This reminds me, some nonprofit donation organizations CEO has five figure monthly salary. Management heavy. Lean operation.

[@williamkao5747]

@@cronostvg I worked for development aid like UNDP and that is the problem. End less meetings with food at resorts, people filling forms and pushing paper around , maybe 1/3 of the budget actually goes to the projects.

[@emslvmoddslv4568]

I would say 20% at least....

[@Alsayid]

Just imagine how much more powerful the Russian economy might be today if a competent, reform minded leader had taken over at the time that Putin did. Putin wanted to return to the comfort (in his mind) of the Cold War, and so he did... but the rest of Russia became frozen in a semi 3rd World status.

[@cv990a4]

Putin wants to be Soviet Leader pretend. Hey, look at me, I'm Leonid Brezhnev!

[@kobemop]

@@cv990a4 putin wants the russian empire not the soviet union

[@Freshbott2]

It could have been the second largest economy in the world. In an alternate universe in the 2010s we wouldn’t have been talking about China surpassing Japan, it would be Russia still at a very respectable third place.

[@user-sw7rm6oe1z]

To be fair - it is hard to rebuild a nation after the disaster years of Yeltsin and the constant push by the US and it's NGOs to destabilize your nation and break it up into pieces.

[@vegeta201168]

@@Freshbott2 russia economy is not in 3rd place there are other countries economy is bigger. .russias economy is not even bigger than california

[@zubin67]

A joke from the Chernobyl series - "What’s as big as a house, burns 20 liters of fuel every hour, puts out a shit-load of smoke and noise, and cuts an apple into three pieces? A Soviet machine made to cut apples into four pieces!"

[@notcompletelynormal]

You say bombing children's hospitals and maternity wards "besides being savage, serves no strategic objective" and conclude it must be mistakes and bad aim. I disagree. Terrorizing has always been a Russian tactic. They're aiming for health infrastructure, 100+ clinics and hospitals hit so far. Cruelty is the point, savagery is the aim. We can't excuse the atrocities by blaming it on bad navigation

[@nydydn]

I also raised an eyebrow there. What does he mean by "no strategic objective". The strategic objective is that people learn to move away when the Russian army comes, which minimizes the necessary forced Russia needs. Not only that the Russian army is known to have used the strategy for more than a century now, but maximizing cruelty is a well known strategy for thousands of years. The mongols being the most well known example, who almost achieved what Putin dreams about, and then talks about, i.e. "a united Eurasia from Lisbon to Vladivostok".

[@piotrd.4850]

Well, it is not conductive to winning of the war. Germans learned that while invading Soviet union and going full genocide immediately on people who initially welcomed them as liberators. Bombing city and littering streets with rubble kills mobility of your own forces - Germans learned it early in Stalingrad.

[@joseaca1010]

If they are, then they are very stupid, strategic terror bombing is just as likely to rile up the population against you, the germans demonstrated it after they bobed london and the UK only got angrier

[@evankurniawan1311]

Nah, it's most likely not intentional. They are aiming for QUICK victory. Terrorizing is a long term victory tactics.

[@Warfoki]

@@evankurniawan1311 ...I think that ship has sailed over amonth ago.

[@inhocsignovinces8061]

I remember editing a Wikipedia page on Russia's economy back in the early 2000s (when I was optimistic about Russia), and adding that Putin had started a national nanotechnology initiative. Just checked the progress on Russia's nanotechology in semiconductors, and they have made no progress at all, the Taiwanese are 14 years ahead of them. Expectations vs reality again.

[@BringbackgAmberleafns]

nanotechnology was a buzzword that i remember hearing a lot in 00s in UK. politicians used it a lot when talking about future job markets or getting people into stem degrees. like how green tech is used today.

[@Itried20takennames]

With it also being a kleptocracy, most “business leader” in Russia have figured out it is easy to take the money meant for development, pocket it, and just make a minor tweak or slap a new cover on something someone else developed, and say “look, we can do just as well.”

[@2drealms196]

Taiwan began its semiconductor industry in the 70s, so its understandable that an early 2000s Russian initiative with only moderate funding would lose trying to break into a fiercely competed semiconductor market against entrenched Taiwanese, Korean, American, Japanese and Dutch competitors that had a 20-30 years head start.

[@shootemups8017]

Taiwan is 14 years ahead of everyone

[@eVill420]

@@BringbackgAmberleafns it's not a buzzword anymore because it's commonplace, lol

[@garrettfitzgerald89]

When you realize that Russia is only a superpower because they have nuclear weapons.

[@dopplerhit8374]

They aren't a superpower though not since the 1990s. Anyways they will soon be wiped off earth "The Great Legal Genocide"

[@kineticstar]

Yup.

[@gavrilovdenis153]

If you believe that analysis that have nothing to do with reality . USA would fail the war the same way . They lost ear even vs smaller country like Vietnam .

[@dnate697]

100%

[@shadowsamurai4074]

Knew that atleats 10 years ago

[@edwardgiovannelli5191]

I've worked 30 years in the industrial machine design business, and I've worked with a couple russian engineers in that time. I am not the least bit surprised that russian hardware isn't measuring up. Their engineers are all theory and no practice what so ever. Even older experienced engineers are strictly paper pushers, and wouldnt touch a wrench if you held a gun to their heads. Thing is, you can only learn so much from a book, but you can learn a lot more by rolling up your sleeves and getting dirty. Not them. Their designs uniformly sucked, and several times I had to clean up their messes. Personally, I'm impressed they're doing as well as they are. I expected much worse.

[@Ross72A]

They send bad ones and keep good ones

[@ShadowWolfTJC]

After learning about how overhyped Russia's military was, I've been laughing, not in mockery of Russia, but in shock, disappointment, and disbelief towards Russia's illusion of military capability. Why? Because I had previously believed that Russia had at least the 3rd best military in the world (behind the United States, and maybe China), only for a well-prepared Ukraine to shatter that illusion that I, along with so much of the world at large, had believed in for our entire lives, and show to the world just how truly overhyped Russia's military was. Nowadays, I have to wonder if Russia's military could stand up to the likes of, say, France, Germany, The United Kingdom, Japan, South Korea, India, or Poland to name a few.

[@Anonymous-ld7je]

The answer is no, barring the use of nukes, in a conventional war Russia would be crushed by all of those countries 1v1. And probably multiple more.

[@vihtoripuurola3775]

Germany would crush any Russian invasion. Their capability and capacity far outpaces that of Russia. Russians are only good in the defense, and that is at the expense of many human lives that they are willing to throw at the enemy.

[@Zarastro54]

All those countries would slap Russia silly in conventional war. If the Japanese population wasn’t so against it, they probably would have retaken the Kuril Islands by now.

[@mwanikimwaniki6801]

@@Zarastro54 😂😂Just when we need Japan to go imperial it is pacifist. I wanna see what the Japanese could make with their newfound industrial might.

[@ronkolek613]

@@mwanikimwaniki6801 to be fair, they started talking about the unresolved status of the Kurils soon after the invasion. And in return Russia started military exercises on said islands. 3000 troops tied up at a time manpower is at a premium. An excellent move by Japan.

[@glennewell2436]

Even 30 years ago it was assumed that Russian maintenance, components and build quality would equate to half of its missiles being stuck in their silos if ever the signal to launch was given. Unfortunately the US could never know for sure which ones would be the duds: if only a fraction launched, reached their targets and detonated the damage would still be colossal- and that is what the Russians have based their entire defence strategy on.

[@bighands69]

The US would not be tracking individual lanches what they would be doing is watching for atmosphere effects such as thermal signals. The idea that Russia can launch low travelling nuclear missiles that can travel across the ocean at hundreds of feet of atmosphere is nothings short of ridiculous. They have to use high altitude launches that descend and those would stand out like a sore thumb. Russia's real threat is that they can launch from submarines but that is a complex procedure on its own. Britain has a much better aerospace industry and even they struggle with submarine launches.

[@SuperNevile]

All of which, on both sides, depends on people in the chain of command doing their jobs. And as you say, this is the action in defence, but to launch a first strike?

[@haroldbell213]

Made in porkistan

[@greaserbubtheoriginal7923]

i agree if only 10% worked thats the end of the world as we no it

[@AW-zk5qb]

This just shows that the world has been much better off with Pax Americana, the period where the US has been the most powerful nation in the world. Imagine if China or Russia had been the most powerful nation in the world. The world would be much more violent and liberal democracies would be much weaker and less prominent on the world stage

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

Corruption in a political system is such an eroding faction in the performance of a nation. You see the best-performing nations in the world have all low corruption.

[@markdsm-5157]

not necessarily.. this is a case of Western vs Eastern style of corruption. Corruption in the west goes to shareholders.. charging the government 120 dollars for a $2.10 toilet seat. Since they make so much per toilet seat there are always plenty to go around and if a case goes missing then they can eat those costs.. While in the East that toilet seat costs the government $2.10 but for the CEOs, managers, and logistical corruption to get their share they end up never having enough toilet seats and can't eat those costs like they can in west, thus the end user might never see that toilet seat..

[@bjrnhjortshjandersen1286]

@@markdsm-5157 Sounds like Soviet....and PUTIN´s Russia is just the same management old KGB pals and business as usual. Older Russians should be able to adapt

[@MN-vz8qm]

The whole competition thing... I don't know. As a french, we don't have multiple companies to produce our equipment, just one for each type, and they make decent products overall. I think the main issue is more about corruption than competition between companies.

[@apennameandthata2017]

French cars cannot compete….

[@donquixote1502]

@@apennameandthata2017 Compete about what?

[@donquixote1502]

Yes, the same in Sweden.

[@plr2473]

Russia used a large amount of its precision munitions in Syria over the past several years. As we can see in the video, due to their manufacturing infrastructure these munitions are not easily replaced. It left their air force ill prepared for the invasion of Ukraine. Yet one of many reasons why things have gone so poorly for them

[@banto1]

Russia helped Assad level whole cities. Just the opposite of precision weapon usage.

[@plr2473]

@@banto1 Right. But the fact still stands. They used their precision munitions in many cases. Especially when targeting enemy positions

[@williamsherman1942]

@@plr2473 Until those stocks run out and they level the cities instead

[@jimc9516]

you missed one tiny factor: corruption - it's the foundation of the entire politico-economical structure in russia, including the army. 95% of whatever money gets allocated for those "super fighter jets" goes to the yachts and 5% to the jets.

[@jasonbourne9819]

Socialism

[@ZuLKiNG]

This..and they get dual or triple citizenship so that they won't have to stick around either.

[@jonber9411]

@@jasonbourne9819 Wrong answer- in the 60s sweden had one of the most modern armies. Produced it's own fighterjets. Built it's own tanks and guns and cannons. And they had a huge standing army and reservists. A country of 8 milion people, had industrys like Saab, Volvo, Bofors, Scania, Ikea, ect. And the quality was amazing. And one other fact about sweden is that at that time corruption was probably non existing. And... it was a social democratic system. Hence socialism is not the answer. But corruption is a huge factor.

[@jasonbourne9819]

@Jonas- that's because Sweden was already an advanced nation much earlier before socialism came to prominence. Socialism corrupts.

[@jonber9411]

​@@jasonbourne9819 Wrong again. Sweden was one of europes most poor countrys late 19th century. It was very much not an advanced nation. Social reforms made Sweden prosperous. Industry, healthcare, education and a broad consensus between the power of government and private investors.

[@franzzrilich9041]

I was involved in a six-year long private analysis of Soviet logistics in 1978 to 1984. We were told by US govt officials that not only was the Soviet civilian economy bad, but so was the military side. Extremely so. They could not in peace time make enough military trucks for peacetime routine military use, and they employed surplus military trucks for the civilian economy. The situation was that the weekly toilet paper supply was delivered to the US embassy by rusting ten ton trucks, the supply occupying the middle of the bench seat in the cab of the truck. Our war plans for the bulk of our fighters was to use near-range ground attack missiles against the ever-accumulating hordes of old trucks from the civilian side being parked in a few Polish prepared forward sites, whose locations were obvious. We had no intentions of flying over the truck parks and machine gunning them. There would be a lot of anti-aircraft guns and missiles surrounding the truck parks, so that was why we had an endless supply of five and ten mile range missiles. Similar problems existed with Soviet tanks.

[@juancana457]

With this level of incompetence, it seems rather likely a murderous Narcissist, PUTIN, would employ nuclear weapons, "how else can I win? I DESERVE victory!" "Screw the the rest of the world!"

[@sandman0123]

That's how the Soviets essentially lost the Cold War or at least it was a big contributing factor. For example in the US, there was a flow of technology between the civilian and military industries. In the USSR, keeping the military competitive took too much resources and there was an increasing gap between the civilian and military industry, until this ever widening gap became untenable. The Soviet military was too secretive to pass anything into the civillian realm and the civilian industry was too far behind to be of much help at the cutting edge. Of course, that's not to say that there wasn't any crossover between the two industries but military was always favoured. In the socialist block it was sometimes called the "Fregoli Industry". It meant that civillian factories could be converted into being arms suppliers, within a short time, say, 3 days. For example the automated cigarette making machine happened to make cigarettes which were 7.62mm in diameter (or close) and could be converted to make ammunition. Guess what the AK47 takes - 7.62×39mm cartridges! The canning factory was built to be reconfigurable to make shells for large guns etc. (Why Fregoli? Probably because of this dude, a quick change artist: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopoldo_Fregoli )

[@donhelley976]

A long time ago a fan asked science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon if 90 percent of the genre was crap. To which Sturgeon replied "90 percent of everything is crap." This is known as Sturgeon's law. Now let us apply this "law" to Russia. Unfortunately, a few will work.

[@SamSantalaArt]

Going to disagree targetting civilians is a result of non-precision missles. Russia has a long track history of explicitly targeting civilians to break the back of morale, such as in the Soviet Afghanistam War of the 80's. It's deliberate.

[@gregagregy]

Russia is like a precise neuro surgeon compared to USA who bombs eveything and kills millions of covillians. After that they start peace talks👍

[@paulmakinson1965]

I was part of a team of the first westerners to visit the Orbita company in Dnipropetrovsk that build the missile guidance for the SS20 nuclear missiles. Their missile guidance was done with 8 bit processors locally made. They were programmed in assembly language. There had to be several versions because the processors always had some part of the instruction set that was inoperative. They had very little memory to store and run the software. The programmers were geniuses to write workarounds for the missing instructions and optimize the program for the available memory and processing speed. To compensate for the lack of accuracy and reliability of the missile, they just had greater numbers and more powerful warheads. If you lob enough of these things at your enemy, you will most probably hit something of value. That is probably why Russia has so many more and bigger nukes than the US. As Stalin said, quantity has a quality of its own.

[@bighands69]

That may have worked 50 years ago where precision and detection was nowhere near what it is today. Having missiles today that require high altitude launch and descend would stand out like a sore thumb. Such systems can easily be tracked by laser with other exotic methods and the Russians have to know this as well.

[@trudycolborne2371]

Thank you. Your comment has done wonders for my nuclear dread. I pondered that question since the show over substance aspects of Russian hardware became apparent in this conflict. Despite the saber rattling it's entirely possible that Russia is capable launching some nuclear missiles that just land back in their lap or hit me in rural Canada when they meant to strike an American city. I hope their incompetence will deter them from trying. While at least one in 6000 is likely to succeed at least one of those is destined to fail spectacularly. I like that idea.

[@isaacdressel4267]

Lol Napoleon quote?

[@geoffreycharles6330]

Dnipropetrovsk is in Ukraine today.I don't know when you were there but you were in Ukraine and not in Russia.

[@howiescott5865]

wow, WoW, WOW... missiles guided with hi-tech 8088 processors with 64k ram expandable to 128k maybe?... is a hard drive optional?

[@christopherjames9843]

As the old story goes: American ballistic missiles are accurate enough to put in thru the Kremlin bathroom window.

[@subcitizen2012]

There's no bathroom windows in Russia. In Russia, you ARE the bathroom window.

[@joelmendes4506]

people in middle east killed as collateral damage disagrees.

[@kfiscal01]

And now, detonate on a toothbrush.

[@piotrd.4850]

90m CEP is hardly that. Also - what bathrooms? What windows?

[@joefreeman9733]

Laughter. As a former US Marine I can believe a failure rate of 60 percent in missiles. Missiles especially mobile units are somewhat delicate. As are their launchers and radars. I still remember live fire exercises outside 29 Palms of the Hawk missile system an AA missile. The successful firing rate was around 20 to 25 per cent.

[@ricecakeboii94]

60% failure rate isn’t bad if they have the quantity to back it up. Bet it’ll still be scary if a dud lands next to you. I’d shit my pants before laughing it off 😂

[@DS-wo8wr]

The Hawk was a long time ago

[@paulbedichek2679]

Our munitions are seeming to blow up real good,on target. Stingers hiring 90% of targets Javelins at near the same. We are low on the latter gave them one third our stocks.

[@allangibson2408]

@@paulbedichek2679 That’s one way of clearing near expired munitions (that you can’t just surplus).

[@ErebusXanti]

Good ole Camp Wilson, fun time to watch jets taxi in and out of the air field there and seeing mortar squads obliterate the small hill, ospreys flying about and other fun junk 😀

[@dreamingflurry2729]

Well, the Soviet Union also had competition! They had different design bureaus headed by people like Oleg Antonov or Artem Mikoyan (MIGs are his babies!) etc. etc. Sure they weren't as cutting edge and never had as much funding as the US, but they did produce decent weapons and did compete with one another!

[@davidford3115]

Illusion of competition. When the government owns everything, you are not competing to provide the best product, you are competition to win the approval of your superiors. Case in point is the Trabant of East Germany.

[@markbantz9699]

Nice try!😂😂

[@bigboss337]

”Our power comes from the perception of our power” - mikhail gorbachev. Sums up the russian military pretty well. Its about having the correct image so that others fear you

[@bjornh4664]

They say that in the army, you should remember that your equipment is supplied by the lowest bidder. But what if there's a monopoly with no incentive to produce the best the budget allows (especially so if the budget ends up in someone's pocket)? That's when you get the Russian army.

[@davidnoel9355]

The sad fact is that even with an 80% failure rate for their nuclear weapons, the ~1200 working missiles would still constitute the second largest nuclear arsenal in the world. I think their nuclear weapons will suffer catastrophic failures rates if used but would still cause devastating effects around the world.

[@infidelheretic923]

I’m confident that many of Russia’s nuclear weapons are in a state of disrepair. But I’m also certain that they still have hundreds that would hit their intended target if fired and one is too many.

[@cloroxbleach9222]

Nukes take a lot of money to maintain, Russia simply does not have the capability to maintain both their strategic missile forces AND their conventional forces at the same combat ready level

[@uhliuv]

@@cloroxbleach9222 also with thousands kilometers of borders... russia facing a huge problem to guard their territories

[@williampatrickfagan7590]

Just glad they are.

[@richardbell7678]

Like other weapons, nuclear weapons have a shelf life. Of particular note is the tritium used to boost yields. Fusion reactions between deuterium and tritium produces, along with heat, a burst of neutrons which generate more fission reactions. However, tritium decays into helium3 with a half life of about five years. Helium3 is transformed into helium4 (the most common helium isotope) by absorbing a neutron. neutrons absorbed by helium3 contamination of the tritium reduces the yield of the weapon. Of course, nuclear weapons are designed not to detonate, except when they are supposed to. Any system that reduces the likelihood of a system operating by accident will also reduce the likelihood of the system operating as intended. Part of the reason that nuclear missile targeting schemes had so many extra missiles heading for important targets was because of the expectation that there would be warheads that failed to detonate

[@rogerclarke7407]

Even if an atomic weapon fizzles it is still a very large bang and a very big mess.

[@Janoip]

@@rogerclarke7407 Yes but starting a chain reaction is the real problem with nuclear weapons, you have to make a system that starts all the charges at the same time for the weapon to work. For that you need very specialized/expensive technology, uranium etc. is available to most countries. And dirty bombs are also rather limited without an explosion that spreads the material. Why One Nuke Is Never Enough - Myth of the Overkill kzbin.info/www/bejne/iIvTZH-AYrynqLc

[@lynncomstock1255]

@@rogerclarke7407 How big a bang does the fission trigger make alone?

[@Paul-wo3qh]

Interesting Post. Thank you

[@kruler-westoz-nauman3638]

@@lynncomstock1255 Depends on the warhead size, ranges from 20kg to over 200 kgs of mixed density conventional explosives, so not a huge bang, but it would be a very dirty bang, still talking radiation deaths. just not widespread asset destruction.

[@TheBigDaddyClub]

i was in Russia a few months back. i never imagined Russia would fall so badly when it comes to its military might. I have now understood that nuclear was the only solid deterrent Russia ever had. may even not that. time will tell.

[@Anonymos321]

Now you might understand that in WW2 Germany ( fighting against the British Empire and against USA and against the USSR ) at the same time had 7 million war dead and the USSR only fighting against Germany had 25-27 million war dead.

[@TheBigDaddyClub]

@@Anonymos321 yes. the great patriotic war was actually a joke. everything in Russia is a joke. its now very clear why they are so infamous, weird and anti-social.

[@rhensontollhouse]

If only 1 in 100 of their nukes work it is still a too many. They also understand that even if they launch nukes, and even 1 does work, they will all die in the return salvo.

[@bazoo513]

Let me just note that in Soviet days there was a fierce competition between, say, aerospace "design bureaus", as they called them, despite none of them were private. It was partially a competition for prestige (and "dachas") among "chief designers", but it was still competition. Even that seems to have disappeared now.

[@krakhedd]

Welcome to why capitalism is the best of the worst systems we have, and an explainer as to why non-competitive governments suffer similar fates

[@stephenbaxter3369]

There is no doubt that the USSR had great Scientists and Engineers that created great technology. But the USSR is a failed project - something that Putin refuses to accept. The creation of the Russian Federation was flawed from the beginning and it can only hope to be successful in the future once Putin is gone.

[@bazoo513]

@@stephenbaxter3369 Well, USSR failed long ago, and now Putin seems to be pushing Russia into the abyss, too. Hopefully, he will not pull the whole world with it...

[@history-stamp]

All the while saying capitalism was wasteful.

[@rushsunar8845]

I’m totally blown away with the substandard nature of Russian military arsenals.

[@tellyboy17]

Oh well, at least the Ukrainian army isn't;)

[@bighands69]

The US military like Roman 2000 years ago is based on the market economy. It means development and advancement is based on commercial success. It then gives the government the power to build really fancy things and people mistakenly assume that it is the government building it because of lots of wealth. The iphone 13 is much more powerful than iphone 1 and the F-35 is much power powerful than the F-4.

[@ImaxNZ]

I have spent zero time concerning myself with the russian military arsenal - on account of living my life. So I'm not really all that blown away ...

[@fluffymyato3334]

@@ImaxNZ meanwhile the russians are being blown away by the quality weapons that nato's infantry use

[@shryggur]

Well, at least Russian military arsenal blew away *you...* That's an achievement...

[@ronmaximilian6953]

As an American, I sincerely hope that Chinese military production has the same problems

[@TransoceanicOutreach]

Seeing as they buy most of their designs from Russia it might well be the case.

[@ronmaximilian6953]

@@TransoceanicOutreach Actually, most of their current designs are indigenous, but were certainly influenced by Russian designs. In a few cases, they've stolen Russian designs and improved on them

[@piotrd.4850]

Yes and no. They have it, they KNOW it, they are slowly but methodically working to correct them. Opposite of Russia. They have similar cultural problem as Russians, Arabs and other authoritarian cultures and not only in military - lack of lower rank trust and initiative.

[@carlfromtheoc1788]

Let's be honest, some blame also has to be placed on the level of training for the military - at all ranks. I mean if you are the captain of the flag ship of the Black Sea Fleet, why are you getting within the known range of Ukranian anti-shipping cruise missiles? And it also appears that while the Russians have/had a bunch of sweet weapons, their logistics stink on ice. Those vehicles being towed by tractors ran out of fuel. How does that even happen with a modern army. I would also bet that money that a fair chunk of the money that should have gone into R&D, quality control, and production went into the pocket silovaki oligarchs. I mean those billion dollar yachts had to be paid for and maintained somehow.

[@berretta9mm158]

...and now, they don't even have the YACHTS....

[@Anonymos321]

We should be happy that corruption weakens the Russian military so much

[@grizzlygrizzle]

... and for a country with enough petroleum to use it as a geopolitical weapon to have vehicles running out of fuel....

[@robertmaybeth3434]

This might be because Russia has historically "trained" most of the lower ranks by terror and beatings. Also the officers treat their men worse than we would treat dogs. You cannot field an effective army when half of it is brutalized by, and can't trust the other half.

[@TheChiefEng]

The Russian military doctrine does not make the same use of NCOs as western militaries do. That is why so many high ranking officers are forced to move to the very front in an attempt to lead the troops. To lose a general in combat in any western military is virtually unheard of. The only western general lost in combat in recent time was actually lost to friendly fire and not enemy action. It seems that the Russian military is hopelessly inefficient. What about WWII will many say. Well, The Soviet Union threw soldiers into the war on the Eastern front in the millions without much concern about how many ended up as casualties. The Soviet Union suffered incredible losses from mid 1941 until the end of the war. Germany lost millions as well but only a fraction compared to the losses on the Soviet side. If Russia was to engage in the war in Ukraine in the same manner, Russia will eventually be bled dry so on that basis, it is extremely important that The West supplies Ukraine with a never ending flood of weapons.

[@ericgranberg8893]

Before the fact, there is no knowable answer to the question. I was an USAF missile launch officer in the 1970's, and frankly we had enough problems with our test launches of hand selected missiles at Vandenberg AFB. There is no way the Russians would fair even as well. But I wouldn't want to test it.

[@compassroses]

Corruption, corruption, corruption.

[@privateerburrows]

I'm absolutely convinced his nukes do NOT work. It costs a lot of money to keep nuclear warheads in working order. And I'm sure some money has been allocated to it; but as always in Russia, the money ends up in someone's pocket, and chewing gum goes in instead of tritium. Not to speak of the age of the delivery systems. What there may be is a few thermonukes in subs kept in working order, and that's worrisome. It doesn't take too many nukes to cause widespread disaster. But I think if it comes to a nuclear exchange, all of Russia will be vaporized in a few hours. The problem is that we are all going to die from the climate consequences; not even talking about radiation.

[@sourabhkarkala343]

I think laser weapons would be the answer to countering nukes..

[@bighands69]

The probably have systems that work but not enough for full nuclear exchange. Nuclear weapons have been way overhyped.

[@vladnurk4710]

assured mutual destruction

[@privateerburrows]

@MVGTZ Not sure why you mention North Korea, but thought I'd mention, my firm belief is that NK is a province of China, and their nukes are designed and made in China, and the launchers are designed and made in China, and their subs are designed and made in China. I don't believe for even a millisecond that a nation where most people starve and whose education is nothing but follow the leader brainwash can possibly have a missile industry, a nuclear industry, a launcher industry, and a sub industry. The whole plan, in a nuke war with the US, is for NK to pretend to be the enemy. No matter how many launchers the US knocks out, more can keep coming in from China through tunnels under the river.

[@mikewilson858]

I figure that cutting corners on nukes must be rampant, especially since you are dealing with systems that will only be used in case of Armageddon. I mean in the unlikely event they get called upon to fire, you probably die from incoming American bombs before they have time to imprison you for embezzlement

[@hugokatz]

I can imagine the new sales pitch for Russian military equipment...."We can't make it work, but you can."

[@davidelliott5843]

There was no fundamental difference between German and Soviet hard left top down (essentially fascist) systems. Putin simply continued the same system. Result is poor quality output made in horrendously wasteful factories.

[@bowenc24]

Makes you wonder what condition their nukes are in, how well have they been kept since the fall of the Soviet Union?

[@tellyboy17]

If there is precious parts in them those have probably been sold a long time ago.

[@larrybuzbee7344]

@@tellyboy17 Trtium is a vital component of most mordern fission-fusion-fision compact warheads. The charge in each weapon is accessible during maintenance because tritium has a very short half life and must be replaced regularly. Right now, tritium is $30k per GRAM. Without it you have a low yeild (3-4 kt maybe) very very dirty bomb. Plutonium is about $4k per gram. There is usually about 5 kilos per warhead.

[@fnyqvist3]

US spends billions each year to make sure their nukes dont deteriorate and remain functional. There is several things in nukes that has to be maintained, specially if it contains tritium (most nukes does). Nukes has an estimated shelf life around 10 years if it's not maintained well. Of the 6000 Russian warheads 1500 is already scheduled for dismantling, and i doubt most of the other 4500 is in shape to be launched. There is probably still enough of them to destroy life as we know it tho.

[@whattwowhat]

There's a reason Sweden and Finland are being fearless about Putin's nuke threats, and why NATO isn't standing down on sending weapons to Ukraine. The biggest leverage Russia has is oil/gas, and some EU countries are willing to sacrifice Ukrainian lives to save their economies while sanctions slowly chip away.

[@larrybuzbee7344]

@@whattwowhat I think the recent performance of Russian forces has given them courage too. Nuclear forces as well as regular ones are equally likely to be hollowed out by corruption, inefficiency and vodka. The Great Bear is has lost it's hair, very embarassing, and uncomfortable in the winter.

[@geoffreycharles6330]

Who exactly expected Russia to produce high grade military gear when she can't produce chips or any other type of sensitive device?

[@Igoriann]

Lol that’s why Russia has a more agile and advanced airplane than some stealth bs that Russia also has radars to detect. That’s why Russia has missiles to take down a stealth plane and also have nuclear submarines that can flatten USA on its own. I wouldn’t be using expensive equipment against ukraine either. Putin is probably just getting rid of the crap he had been storing for decades. This whole illusion that western media and governments are trying to create that Russia is weak is just that, an illusion.

[@thechancellor3715]

Never mind the chips....where are kitchen refrigerators, pretty simple established reliable tech absent marketing bling? Here's the list of top Russian consumer kitchen appliance preferences: Samsung35.1% Bosch22.8% LG15.1% Philips6% Sony5.4% Indesit4.1% ( US Whirlpool) Siemens3.2% Electrolux3% Panasonic2.7% Xiaomi2.7% Zip Russian mfr. Do they even?

[@iamaloafofbread8926]

Real easy to see how strong a nation is by looking at them at their worse and how they manage it. If they don't adapt, they are weak, if they overcome it, they are strong.

[@clumsiii]

curious take you shared... I'm frankly scared what will happen in Donbas. So much life could be lost. My only hope is: Russian desertion (as in any war..but ya.. it's about to get real bad

[@zuruumi9849]

I wouldn't say it's the failure of production companies. Even if everything worked perfectly and not one person was corrupt (and that's obviously not the case) at the end of the day Russia has a 14 times smaller GDP than the USA while still trying to keep partial parity in the army. That has to show somewhere. And that's ignoring that while the US army is built for overseas war, Russian army is mainly built for one on its own territory.

[@jordanthomas4379]

Bottom line, the most advanced military arsenal on earth cannot compensate for well trained infantry and great logistics

[@miroslavhoudek7085]

And russians have neither.

[@jordanthomas4379]

@@miroslavhoudek7085 to be fair, Russia does have pretty good kit (all things considered) it’s poorly maintained in many cases, but they still have it, the real issue is a massive lack of quality training and very bad logistical support

[@shawnnewell4541]

I wonder how good China's new military is? I remember Jane's magazine article a few years ago saying their equipment wasn't good and the training is poor.

[@tellyboy17]

China has the same problems Russia has: a highly corrupt army with low moral soldiers and since most of its equipment is either supplied by Russia or derived from Russian weapons their equipment is mostly junk too.

[@bighands69]

It would be good against smaller military forces due to the large scale but when it comes a well trained military based on western culture it would get destroyed even if that military is several times smaller. Japan for example would wipe the floor with them on every level.

[@trey97561400]

China is fucked financially and they know it so probably not. They over counted their population by something like 100 million, created a law where you could only have one child, and now 50 years from now won't have the population to maintain their country let alone there military both physically and economically

[@richardengland7138]

Given that much of China's kit is a rip off of soviet kit you can work it out. It also has all the built in problems of autocracy .Corruption is elevated to an art form and no one gives bad news to the boss therefore the leaders (Putin is a good example of this) believe that everything is bigger and better than it is.

[@Zankyo137]

don't know, but i know they refused a deal with russia for some T-14 stating their newer tanks were better

[@VeritasVideos]

In regards to your question on the nukes. This is taken from a lengthy letter by an FSB officer ranting about the state of the military. "I am not sure that the “red button” system functions according to the declared data. Besides, plutonium fuel must be changed every 10 years."

[@jacobhuff3748]

The Russian system seems to have an issue with logistics more than anything else. This has been issue Russia for a long time but it has become worse since the collapse of the Soviet Union and China's rise as a manufacturer. Soviet Union made capable weapon systems at a good price but the the Russian federation seems to unable or unwilling to invest in, update or maintain that system. It's Sad, because as an American I think their are some things we could learn from Russian weapon designs. P.S. Kalashnikov refers to the series of Assault Rifles & Machine Guns that based of Kalashnikov's design while the AK-47 & AKs, RPKs & PKs are the models.

[@onlythewise1]

yes one Russian came to America and invented the tv picture tube , look it up

[@paulbedichek2679]

Yes,we learned they make crap that doesn't work.

[@onlythewise1]

@@paulbedichek2679 really why they make first satellite to go into space 1965

[@paulbedichek2679]

@@onlythewise1 You have a terrible memory, it was in the 50's,they were behind then and have fallen much further each year since.

[@757Poppy]

The less than effective Russian military equipment was hinted at during operational failures of the toop of the range Pantshir aa systems in Libya and Syria.

[@adrianbundy3249]

It really does seem like it is another example of the failure of communist style control over an industry. There are some legitimately great ideas from the minds involved sometimes. But it's all severely handicapped from such an ineffective system of madness to actually get a product going, so what they get is usually just disappointing.

[@Freshbott2]

@@adrianbundy3249 Those brilliant Soviet engineers later made for brilliant Western engineers/professors/researchers/entrepreneurs

[@user-fp3cf5vs7m]

Highly effective air defense has proven itself in Saudi Arabia. Yes Mike?) I saw the defeat of the Pantzir in Libya...Yes almost all of these systems were on the march. They didn't even have the Antenna spinning. Was there even a single instance of Panzir suppression in Syria? In Latakia even small drones were shot down in packs, yes they are artisanal, but they are small... In Ukraine a couple of complexes were dropped, a couple were killed on the marches, They are doing a great job, Well if you watch Western propaganda, the Ukrainian army will soon take the Kremlin. This is a big war, with large groups of troops and Ukraine is not a whipping boy, the west understands this, the Kremlin understands this, Kiev understands this, but the western average man who has only black and white understands this... Every day, dozens and dozens of cruise missile strikes are launched against Ukraine-Western specimens don't want to test their strength? I think unlikely, because it is expensive, and the West is counting on an offensive huge operation from Russia to beat the equipment on the marches, the nature of Ukraine is perfect for this, thousands of kilometers of fields with forest belts on the sides! We need to watch not only pro-Ukrainian publika, but also pro-Russian, there every day dozens of defeats of Ukrainian "Tochka-U" Smercha and Grads with the help of Russian air defense...

[@757Poppy]

@@victoriouswillisorius5362 I understand that Russian tanks can't cope with NLAWS, nor their navy with Neptunes. Were the sailors on the Moskva asleep or drunk?

[@jjdelft3216]

@@757Poppy You can watch pro UA or pro RU propaganda, but keep in mind that its exactly that. Always fact check your sources online, its 30 seconds of your day. Just by looking at both sides, but not checking anything, still makes you believe a whole lot of bullshit.

[@happyelephant5384]

Well, you a bit misunderstood term siloviki :) This terms usually means army+police+intelligence +etc - the force of government and that's why term derives from word "sila" - force in russian. Siloviki - not special technocrats from kgb, just offciers of force apparatus, not from civil society/entrepreneurs/managers. Ps siloviki is plural, silovik is singular.

[@rolandtours8404]

Institutionalized incompetence. I can imagine the disdain that scientists and engineers have for such bosses.

[@larryclemens1850]

If what you are saying is true, then Russia has developed a fascist economic system more fascist than the Nazis, who would assume control of companies not enthusiastically pursuing the Nazi party agenda, but would leave the management largely intact.

[@TetsuYkt]

@@larryclemens1850 yes, Russia is a defacto fascist state at this point or at least is very close to becoming one. P. S. I'm from Russia and see the sorry state or our country

[@noalear]

@@TetsuYkt Are you not worried about getting in trouble for talking shit about Russia? Are they so incompetent/underfunded that they wouldn't see this or be able to figure out who you are?

[@michaelryder9885]

An interesting aspect of the Russian arms industry is the trade they carry out with other countries. Russia has sold weapons to other countries over many years, and had a reputation of producing cheap effective munitions (a reputation that almost certainly sucked in poorer nations who needed a defense capability, on a budget). It is likely that this trade at least partially subsidised Russias' miltary spending, and kept the whole lumbering industry in business. It is now clear that this reputation was not only undeserved, but is currently in tatters. The invasion of Ukraine, with the embarrassing performance of the Russian Military, has essentially completely torpedoed the Russian arms industry as a viable option for military procurement for the foreseeable future.

[@liam1666]

i feel like i was one of few who never was impressive with russia china and certain north koreas LARGE military parades...it all looks like old 1980s equipment. it was only ever a game of numbers. and its being proven well equipped and trained troops can be out numbered and still do a job.. Victory to UKRAINE!

[@scottmoore6131]

The reason for why they keep trying annex former Soviet satellites is they need their gdp to add to their own like when they were satellites.

[@adamgardiner5869]

Maybe having a kleptocracy isn't such a good idea now? For every Ruble actually spent on defence, 5 would go in someone's pocket so their defence spending is actually very low.

[@noirekuroraigami2270]

We live in a Kleptocracy lol. Kleptocracy is a fancy way of saying capitalism

[@inso80]

I hear the russian economy is in rubles.

[@imlovely6522]

The fact that we get free videos on KZbin by VisualPolitik is truly a gift 👍

[@bhad]

Russia always expects that 50% of its arms to fail. That's why even India was sceptical about Russian arms but had no choice. Even that 50% was enough for India to win all of its wars. However training and strategy is another game where India excels. Let's hope this war comes to closure as soon as possible and innocent lives are not lost.

[@popopduck877]

If 50% fails just by twice the amount ;) Is it in fact a genius marketing politic?

[@VicMansaMusa]

Lol. This is false. I would like a Russian link to your claims. Do you really think anyone would buy anything with 50% chance of failure? Crazy

[@dmitrishufutinsky2251]

Plus India buys other weapons from 🇮🇱 and 🇨🇵

[@ananddarnal6702]

Plus most of the weapons are made in India under licence & a lot of them are collaborations. India also does better & regular maintenance to them

[@luizcbvianna]

Too much advertises today. I know you need money, but please avoid doing like this one one for a partner and one for yourselves in the beggining of the video.

[@darkwowpg]

First dislike for this channel but the commercial was like 1.44min before it even started.....

[@subcitizen2012]

And like 5 minutes of intro

[@Odin029]

I think that if only 10% of Russia's nukes work, they still have the 2nd largest nuclear arsenal in the world. The only question is whether the top brass know which 10% works.

[@daniellarson3068]

Can these things fail in a bad way upon launch?

[@spartancrown]

Might be third largest by now with China expanding rapidly but just a handful is enough to bring your economy to its knees.

[@matthewq4b]

The ones held by the Navy for the most part are viable. The rest not so much It would not surprise me if none of the ground forces or air forces nukes are viable.

[@danielstapler4315]

@@daniellarson3068 A nuclear weapon will have multiple fail safes. A hydrogen bomb needs something like 6 explosive plates ALL detonating in the same millisecond. The chances of accidental or external caused detonation are very low.

[@Janoip]

@@daniellarson3068 Yes but starting a chain reaction is the real problem with nuclear weapons, you have to make a system that starts all the charges at the same time for the weapon to work. For that you need very specialized/expensive technology, uranium etc. is available to most countries. And dirty bombs are also rather limited without an explosion that spreads the material... Why One Nuke Is Never Enough - Myth of the Overkill kzbin.info/www/bejne/iIvTZH-AYrynqLc

[@magnvss]

One of the aspirations of Putin’s Russia was being respected as a (relatively) modern world weapons producer. This fairy tale was easy to sell to its usual buyers (Third World countries) but not anymore due to the results. It doesn’t matter that, resorting to the traditional historical Russian method of using overwhelming numbers, they finally get to subject Ukraine to a defeat on the regions they want to control: the world is witnessing the disaster. And not because petty tyrants want efficiency (many don’t care) but because it will harder to convince their countrymen that the investment of Russian weaponry will be justified. Finally and again, the price of their corruption will be paid (as mentioned) by human lives and civilians, as desperation push them to use less precise methods with more devastating effects. Of course the best result would be that the West gets behind Ukraine as much as possible as to make Putin's aspirations fail even in its more modest gains (what would prevent yet another adventure in the future) but for that there could be no doubtful players (like Germany and France). A hypothetical Russian "victory" this time (in whatever terms) would mean MORE problems for the future, no less, and the West can't allow it lest it's prepared to make testing (for real) NATO as a next phase, whether by Putin or whoever honcho that gives him an induced heart attack.

[@paulbedichek2679]

No,Russia can't defeat Urkraine on any field with even modest US support, now that we've supplied them with 18 155 howitzers with rocket boosted precision warheads, we've seen the utter devastation these bring ,18 shots 18 kills.They need many more,I''m sure we don't have inexhaustible supply of these $81,000 shells, but w have enough for all the tanks Russia has.

[@j.4332]

When that helicopter gets hit,it takes about enough time for the crew to say "weve been hit mama!"before hit the ground.

[@Kenneth_James]

Expired MREs and food are not a big deal in the military. Even the US has expired MRE's. They can last for 40 years. Your looking at it as a normal consumer. What is inside of them and the fact that now Ukraine has them is far more important.

[@Buckshot99]

Why is there an expiry date then?

[@alexburke1899]

Food science has come along way in past few years and having decent hot food in combat is probably better for troop moral.

[@davidjacobs8558]

yes, if they are manufactured correctly. but the question is, were they?

[@Gitami]

@@Buckshot99 For taste primarily. IE. milk is fine a few days after the listed expiry date, it gets more watery as the fat separates, but beyond that and you begin to gamble with your health. MREs are cooked and packaged to minimize bacteria, so those will last beyond expiry date provided they are properly stored.

[@Kenneth_James]

@@Buckshot99 What then would you do if you’re faced with an emergency and the MRE expiration date is beyond five years? utilize your smell and eyes to decide whether or not the food is safe for human consumption. They usually rate them for 5 years after manufacture date but that is at room temp or above. If they are in the cold climate of somewhere like say Russia then I wouldn't be surprised if they were still good after 25 years. Although even after 5 years it isn't going to taste as good as it might have when it was new. Still is a good sign that even the food the Russian military has is pretty old. As far as why have an expiration? To give you an idea of how long it has been lying around. I mean you need some sort of information

[@lorrygoth]

Is a fully functional nuclear wepon more or less scary than a faulty one when you have no idea weather it will work or not?

[@pbmccain]

Yes. Since if you launch it you are gonna get a response before it lands, it's kinda useless to not launch one thats fully functional.

[@senorhayomayo]

Less is my vote. You’re not going to get anyone sane or smart to volunteer to work around it; so it’s just always a bad idea to make something that’s faulty or unpredictable. I recommend searching for the “Kursk” disaster which resulted from sketchy fuel used in their Russian made torpedoes. Sad story.

[@LaserFur]

nuke vs dirty bomb. given the half life and the level of refinement accuracy I would guess less than half are actually going to work. It would be so easy for a worker to just not calibrate the dial right and say "yep this is good" and then skip all the actual hard work.

[@hull294]

Since Nuclear fall out doesn't stay in one place...intercontinental ballistic weapons unexpectedly/unintentionally exploding in their silos through lack of maintenance/parts/expertise isn't much good for RU or the rest of the world & I haven't even mentioned their battlefield nuclear arsenal or their ship/submarine nuclear arsenal...thats a whole new kettle of fish to be terrified of.

[@liquidminds]

for the people of russia, a lot scarier if they don't work...

[@dovlacro6382]

India bought Russian laser guided shells Krasnopol for howitzers. After 2 years of storage, 50% failure rate.

[@yandespar3490]

I would disagree on the point that the bomb in Mariupol maternity hospital was a misfire. 1. It was a recently renewed building and it was coloured quite brightly. So, no mistake on the part of the personnel could be made unless they are completely blind. It's also not likely to be a hardware issue because there were no eligible military targets nearby. 2. Russian spokesperson announced the hit claiming that it was the base of Azov regiment. 3. Russian artillery and aircrafts have bombed many civilian areas where no military targets are to be found at all. That was on purpose. Of course, there are indeed many issues with the personnel training and hardware. Like when they've bombed a kindergarden and a dentist's office in Chernihiv trying to aim the government building. Missed both times. But it's not always a mistake, it's a war crime made on purpose not because of negligence

[@JamesKerLindsay]

Thanks. A really interesting deep-dive into the Russian defence sector. Very interesting, as always.

[@RobBCactive]

I remember after Soviet days, interviewees explained tanks would loop around Red square to pass several times to make a larger spectacle .. all pravda and mastrovka.

[@hstad100]

One word which describes Russia's Military Industry - CORRUPTION!

[@vec306]

Thanks for the information.

[@ISpitHotFiyaa]

It's like Rumsfeld once said: you go to war with the army you have. Precision missiles are expensive so most countries (even the US) still use a lot of dumb bombs/shells. And that leads to stuff getting hit that shouldn't be getting hit. That's happened in every war since the advent of gunpowder.

[@RaptorJesus]

The difference is that we have plenty of JDAM kits, turning our dumb munitions at least into *guided* if not truly "smart" munitions.

[@tiernanwearen8096]

"Is it true that German facist troops are invincible? napelons army was concerned invincible yet it was beaten" Joseph vissorvich djugasvilli

[@beautanner8409]

In regard to the Ukrainian maternity hospital that was bombed: "This attack is not the fruit of an evil general who wants to kill children, it's the result of not having precision missiles" 13:23 - you guys don't know that, at all. The reasoning that immediately preceded this statement doesn't offer any confidence to the claim. Usually this channel is pretty good, but that was sloppy.

[@themongru]

As he said, there is no motive for them deliberately bomb a maternity ward. As usual the Western media latches onto anything negative and portrays it so that they can make Russia out to be the some kind of super villain. This is the only logical explanation I have heard that isn't based on virtue signaling fueled hysteria

[@beautanner8409]

@@themongru He said what I quoted, and it's not something he can know. Sloppy. (By the way, Russia is the villain here (though I'm not sure 'super' fits, given their performance) That's not virtue signaling, or Western 'hysteria'... it's just having eyes, an ounce of reason and a semblance of a conscience.

[@themongru]

@@beautanner8409 The Western media is making out that it was a deliberate attack, something they cannot know. I see your point though that he stated it as a fact in the video rather than saying it 'may have been' which is misleading. It's interesting that whenever the US invades a country and commits war crimes no one seems to care, but as soon as Russia does it everyone is waving around flags of the country being invaded. I am against all wars, I just find the blatant hypocrisy and virtue signalling disturbing.

[@beautanner8409]

@@themongru Of the two US invasions in the last 20 odd years, Afghanistan was generally supported. Iraq, on the other hand, faced a lot of protest (millions marching). When the US committed war crimes, (i.e. Abu Ghraib), this was front page news. Acknowledging US crimes doesn't absolve them, but it's difficult to say that "no one seems to care".

[@paulbedichek2679]

Obvious the Russia targeted the maternity hospital.

[@donaldbussey2326]

I've been thinking of their nukes for weeks now. My guess is some would work, buy many would not. We don't want to put this to the test. But I'm sure NATO's would work as intended.

[@russetmantle1]

It's possible there's a grand irony here in the nukes question. In that it's possible Putin might use nukes but they wouldn't work, while the US's nukes probably work but they would be reluctant to use them. Lots of bluff on both sides and I'm kinda hoping we don't find out either way.

[@rido1274]

I miss something of importance, safety and comfort. The equipment gives little to non protection against incoming fire. Every Russian strategy is based on equipment and soldiers are expandable. Like in WWII everything should be made cheap and effective, without thinking about the person handling it. In WWII the Russian sacrificied themself in large numbers, only to reach their targets one day earlier. You cannot only blame the Nazis for the huge death toll. Russian always thinks in quantity instead of quality. This is also the reason why alot of Russian soldiers refuse to serve in this war.

[@rocketraccoon1976]

That's no longer a good idea for modern Russia. Isn't Russia's population shrinking? They won't be able to replace battlefield casualties as easily as they did in WW2.

[@Janoip]

@@rocketraccoon1976 Yes Russia has one of the fastest aging populations, low life expectancy and a brain drain of young well educated people.

[@williamzk9083]

The commissars executed political opponents and ethnic minorities by driving them into the notoriously effective and well trained German Machine Guns. The Germans often found Soviet Soldiers unarmed or with bullets in the back. The Russian population is collapsing demographically due to their economic inefficiency and arms expenditure. In 5 years they won't be able to fight a war. It's also correct to say that the Soviet Union blamed the population decline caused by the Holodomor genocide in the Ukraine, their own ethnic cleansing, their gulags in Siberia, the terror their scorched earth policies of destroying crops as they retreated on the German Army. The Russians also invented a huge number of atrocities. (as they are doing now)

[@blowitoutyourcunt7675]

Yup, most soldiers are highly trained and highly motivated to serve in their country's *volunteer* army. Russian soldiers are old drunk men or young boys who were conscripted, they are all untrained and Expendable including the officers which is no way to run an army.

[@jjdelft3216]

Actually thats largely a myth. In the beginning of WW2 that was certainly the case, but the quality ánd quantity both changed for the better as the war progressed. And the Eastern units of the Soviet Army were way better trained than the troops in the west of Russia, so when they arrived it made a change too.

[@TheGolfdaily]

All we need is:- Russian nuclear missiles that explodes - without leaving the base.

[@OlivierGabin]

Already, I have seen, on a DW reportage here on YT, that 60% of all ordnance dropped or fired at Ukrainian targets failed to detonate on impact or by proximity fuse. There might be some outright sabotage as a reason for this appalling number of duds, but piss-poor manufacturing quality is a good explanation too, and, as I suspect, a better one for 90% of the duds recorded by the Ukrainian receiving side.

[@HexerPsy]

The issue of design and competition, is that even within one company you need multiple design teams to complete to create the best product. Famous designs such as the first smartphone (an iPhone) were created by promoting competition of design within the company - until someone decides on the design path to go down to. Of course, this method of designing doesnt scale. 10X more teams doesnt create 10x better design - but you may chance getting something brilliant once in a while. So for anyone in a future position of power: breed competition - then focus on the best path in front of you.

[@macstmanj3]

Definitely a good 30,000ft view, but there might be a couple issues with what you said here. I hope you take this as constructive criticism, because your presentation is really well done! Poor military performance is easy to blame on equipment. But equipment is a much smaller part of military effectiveness than things like logistics networks, training, doctrine, and communication. I appreciate that you are trying to give a perspective that anyone could understand, but I think the situation is a lot more complicated. TONS of the US military equipment is sole source, meaning no competition. There is competition at the bid process, and that isn't always the case. That is why we pay so much for our equipment. Russian pilots get substantially less flight time each year than US pilots, due in large part to the fact that flight hours are EXPENSIVE. Their equipment is only part of their limitation.

[@honzabalak3462]

AK-47 is the first but also the rarest and worst pattern of AK. Fully replaced in 1960s. How on earth did this pattern of an AK become such a "legend" is beyond me.

[@Aesoporific]

Video games. The distinctive look and sound makes it stick out in ways that most others didn't. Add in some wartime experience with them in Korea and Vietnam and the fact that they are stupid cheap second hand and you have a recipe for outsized influence.

[@austinsmith3011]

Interesting. What is the best pattern of the AK? The newest one?

[@honzabalak3462]

@@Aesoporific It's not cheap. Like I said, actual AK-47 rifles are extremely rare and highly valued by collectors, since the gun has been so quickly replaced both in service and in production. AKM (the gun which replaced the AK-47 in 1959) is probably the most common gun on the planet. About 20 different countries manufactured a variant of it (compared to like 5 which manufactured the AK-47) and most importantly, AKM is still in production. Though more so for civilian purposes because as a military rifle it's obsolete.

[@honzabalak3462]

@@austinsmith3011 Newest? Who can tell? AKs are in production in several countries. New models come and go, especially if we are talking about the bastardised variants meant for US civilian market. Best? Hard to say. Each country manufacturing AKs made slight changes to the design, compared to the original Soviet version. For example the Poles - they developed their own distinct burst fire mechanism for their Wz.88 and Wz.96 rifles (which they use to this very day). They also have a very specific grenade launcher and optics attachment solutions, different from everyone else. As for the Russians, they are currently fielding AK-74M (1991) and AK-12 (2018). The Ukrainians are using late pattern (mid-1980s) Soviet AK-74 (infantry version) and AKS-74 (paratrooper version) as their main military rifles. AK-74M came after the fall of USSR so they never adopted it. Although I'm willing to bet they have captured quite a lot of these rifles by now.

[@ecdhe]

The fact that Russia has to deal with monopolies can not explain everything. For its next-gen fighter jets, the U.S. Air Force pretty much has only Lockheed Martin and Boeing. The French Air Force only has Dassault, and yet was able to produce the Rafale which is touted as a great fighter jet (albeit after a long and painful process). Favoring loyalty over competence when it comes to place people at the top posts however does matter tremendously.

[@fringetravelideas]

You have no idea what you’re talking about. On the f35 there are parts from Raytheon, Pratt and Whitney, LMT and general dynamics. Not to mention chips are from microchip, nvidia.

[@PeterMuskrat6968]

The main problem with the Russia military is the level of Corruption and Nepotism that goes on there. Generals aren’t promoted for their skills, they are promoted because they know a guy who knows a guy. That’s why their tactics and strategy has been ass.

[@tigoes]

Are you sure rafale is a great fighter jet? lol He did not say Sukhoi is a bad jet rather that they are missing precision bombs. I think Russian arms industry is exceptionally good. But yes, they do have mass production issue (money) and seem to have much less professional military staff than expected. Russian invasion force is to small for that size of country. Ukraine is not an easy deal, NATO never dealed with such a large and militarily literate adversary. And NATO as well proves to have a very limited effectiveness.

[@TheShadowOfZama]

The most important thing is not state-owned vs free market or even monopoly vs competition. It's whether people are competent and honest. One bad CEO can ruin a megacorp now imagine what rampant corruption and nepotism can do. State owned vs private merely makes for a difference in owner. As for monopoly vs competition whilst monopolies are generally considered bad as they stiffle innovation in the modern Western world. In Germany at the start of the 20th century for example monopolies or cartels as they were called were considered good. Big companies had massive amount of resources avaialble to them which meant they could much easier afford expensive R&D projects much like how Amazon, Apple and Tesla are investing a lot of money in developing all kinds of new tech nowadays.

[@fredsmith5473]

It's not just monopolies, there's also a corruption problem. It's quite easy for someone highly placed to syphon off allocated funds and cut corners. An example was seen in the early stages when a lot of heavy vehicles had failed tyres. They have a hard life and deteriorate with age and especially exposure to sunlight, although they look OK. If they look OK, pocket the money intended for new tyres. There are other things at work, such as not wanting the army to become too powerful for fear of military coups and the structure of the army.

[@johntait491]

Interesting and informative. Thank you.

[@pond_people]

Very informative Thank you

[@danilolabbate]

About Russian nukes, the fact that no other country has decided to go directly into war against Russia clearly demonstrate those countries take Russia's nuclear capabilities seriously. International politics major rule is, two nuclear countries never clash directly. So, better safe than sorry, I guess.

[@seneca983]

China and India are nuclear powers and they have clashed in Ladakh...using wooden clubs and sticks with nails in them.

[@afonsoabreu5144]

Two nuclear countries never clash ? tell that to pakistan and india, india and china, iran and israel...

[@seneca983]

@@afonsoabreu5144 Iran doesn't have nukes, at least not yet.

[@danilolabbate]

@@afonsoabreu5144 Pakistan and India have disputes, but things never escalate to full war, like the one happening in Ukraine. Same with China and India, there are minor incidents, but neither side wants to escálate.

[@Dave-si2im]

I was in the UK army in the 80's and it was known then that the Russians had a massive military force but most of their equipment was old, out dated crap. Their logistics were poor and army ill disciplined. It would seem not much has changed. The only reason they did ok against the Germans, eventually, is because their army was twice the size of the German army, who were fighting far from home and the Germans were fighting on many fronts. The Russians haven't really had many successful military campaigns and the only reason they were/are considered a world power is because of their nuclear capability.

[@wwb7091]

Yup.... in 1905, Russia got their butt kicked by Japan, when Japan had only recently emerged from the middle ages.

[@afonsoabreu5144]

@@wwb7091 or in the 30's with finland Or in the 80's in Afghanistan, the list goes on XD

[@BringbackgAmberleafns]

russia wouldnt have won if it werent for the US and UK giving it tech, food and war material. and the only reason it became a super power after the war was with all the tech it got from germany and us. when that finally became proper dated and old tech its economy fell along with eventually its empire.

[@claudemaggard7162]

Ya Russia is a cold place. That is alot of the problem for there hardships in life. And they are run by a dictator more or less. So the country runs everything in there government.

[@giorgospapadopoulos7709]

And on top of that they try to invade their neighbours and still their resources like Scotland, Ireland and Wales 😁

[@MyRendersonique]

Brilliant. Very well researched.

[@Tgspartnership]

Another great report... Many thanks 😁

[@ajr993]

My guess is that at most only 15% of Russian nukes actually work. Maintenance of nukes is technically demanding and must be done frequently else the nukes just won't work or will partially work. Even worse are the staged fusion bombs, they require even more maintenance. You also have to remember that it takes tens of billions of dollars to maintain the number of nukes Russia has. Is Russia really dedicating that much money towards maintenance, and how much has been siphoned off due to corruption? If 10% was siphoned off the top, that would mean certain elements of the nuclear weapons wouldn't be maintained and would be very likely to fail.

[@MrVillabolo]

What kind of maintenance?

[@zinjanthropus322]

Imagine what a country like Poland or Sweden could have done to them. They are kinda lucky they discovered their inadequacy in a weaker nation like Ukraine.

[@RobBCactive]

Those countries would have had many allies, Russia's just a bully so wouldn't risk it. Finland and Sweden are simply taking advantage of Putin's incompetent strategy to join NATO officially.

[@LathropLdST]

After Odessa (if it falls) they will move to Moldova. If they fail in Odessa they might go to the Baltics... And your scenario may come true.

[@Zankyo137]

@@LathropLdST well, the black sea fleet running south (where fire chance are lower) don't exactly scream that Odesa is a near futute target. also Odesa had 54days so far to prepare, and likely more to come. If mariupol is taking them all this time, Odesa is gonna be hell for Russia

[@daniellarson3068]

@@LathropLdST They have stated this as their intention. It's kind of like the old domino theory. Sending good weapons in copious quantities to Ukraine may make them bleed and forestall their plans.

[@And-lj5gb]

As a Pole, I'm not sure we would've put up a better fight than Ukrainians (unless heavily supported by our NATO allies, of course). Apparently we only have 10-20% of anti-aircraft and anti-tank weapons compared to that of Ukraine. We've purchased a lot of stuff recently like F35 aircraft, Abrams tanks, Bayraktar TB2 drones, Javelin missiles and the Patriot SAM systems but it will only arrive in a few months to years. Also Ukraine had more trained soldiers due to ongoning Donbas conflict and a bigger teritory (so Russian forces were spread thin). If Poland wasn't a NATO member, Russia could've had a bigger chance of capturing Warsaw than Kyiv. But luckily, NATO has mobilised due to the conflict and we've had some 50 aircraft from countries like UK, France, the Netherlands and even Sweden relentlessly patrolling our airspace from the beginning of the war and American soldiers deploying their own Patriot systems on our soil until the ones we've purchased arrive.

[@karljordan19]

Any country can show off a few tanks and some missiles but war is much more then just showing off your military equipment! 🙏🏼😳

[@CaptainGyro]

As usual another great video.

[@MelkorPT]

It's hard to aim and pull the trigger when you have trotters instead of opposable thumbs.

[@dopplerhit8374]

Lol

[@TheGruntski]

The academic community conspired for decades to inflate the size and competence of the Russian bear. It's time we took a hard look at these liars.

[@davidferrara1105]

Speaking of obsolete, it's now called the AK-74 after its revamp in 1974.

[@tplyons5459]

Hate to tell you this but the AK-47 went out of production in 1959 replaced by the AKM. There have been so many marks of the design that the troops in Ukraine are using the AK-12 and 14.

[@lukejonte8379]

Great video, guys. Depressing though, when you imagine 400 tank crews (1600 men?) literally cooked alive in poorly designed tin cans.

[@kunjalssj]

Please make a video on the Sri Lankan economic crisis!

[@28ebdh3udnav]

It's corruption that's the issues. For example, the AK 47 and it's immediate replacements are pretty great overall. But now a days, the AK 12 has been said to be made of cheap plastic with other cheap parts. An Ak 47 and ak74 are the great ones but when a new one is going to get released, it's usually crap and garbage. Heck, here in the states, you can grab a civilian model AR-15 with a 16 or 20 inch barrel with a standard 30 round magazine, and that's better than what the Russians are using. It's sad but true