See, I knew there was something to my earlier analysis. I hadn’t heard this, but the sheer number (17,000 US+NATO Javelins sent, probably half delivered) of these missiles vs. the relatively low number of Russkie tanks killed (according to one estimate 660, a higher estimate, 1,000) is horrifying.
Assume only half the Russkie tanks and all other vehicles (2000 others high end, 1000 low) were killed by these weapons, that would leave a high end of 1,500 destroyed by Javelines, low end of 800. That’s 8,500 Javelins to take out 800-1,500 tanks. Exept wait! Easily half of those tanks/other kiled were NOT killed by Javelins but by artillery, air, mines, other antitank weapons. Which means we have sent 17,000 Javelins that killed 400-750 tanks.
Now put what he said here into this equation. It would make sense. Whether Javs don’t work, or whether Ukes don’t know how to work them is another story. But it’s pretty clear that they absolutely do not give you one shot, one kill. More like 21 shots to one kill (high) or 10:1 low.
Yep, a lot of it is the people using them. No doubt our boys would have trouble if they were just handed a bunch of Russian hardware and told to fight a war too.
I remember 1982 in Lebanon. There were Soviet SAMs (I think S-200s) in the Bekka Valley there. When manned by Lebanese (or maybe Syrians, don’t remember), the Israelis (or Jews, as they’re called by the Azovs) would easily take them out. When manned by Russians, Israel would lose planes trying to take them out (eventually they did, but at a cost). It may have been as simple as the Russians holding off on activating their radar, or knowing the tricks that Israel used to get them the Arabs to give away their positions, but those same missiles were much more deadly in the hands of Russians.
Also nice to see we can spare 17,000 missiles. Have the Chinese agreed to sell us the components to re-build our supply, or is that still in work? Same for the Russians regarding the raw materials needed. (don’t you love just-in-time, saves money!)
“ they (Javelins) absolutely do not give you one shot, one kill. More like 21 shots to one kill (high) or 10:1 low.”
They have been thoroughly tested by the Militaries of many Nations over many years, and the probability of kill is well known (>90%).
The assumption that all Javelins provided to the Ukrainians have already been expended, is an obvious error. You have no idea of the number of shots, or of the shot to kill ratio.
ATGMs like Javelins, drones, and Western Intelligence made it unsafe for Russian vehicles to move around in the Ukraine. The new Artillery capability is making it unsafe for them to stand still. Their losses are going to accelerate, as they lose a lopsided Artillery contest - as was recently shown by the destruction of the 74th Motorized Rifle Regiment at their failed River crossing near Bilohorivka. The Western Artillery is now a game changer, like ATGMs were during the initial assault.
At the meeting of the NATO foreign ministers (plus Finland and Sweden) yesterday, the NATO Secretary General declared that Ukraine can win this war. Based on the supporting actions taken, that seems to reflect the intent and assessment of NATO, rather than a vague hope.
Russia massively overcommitted its available ground combat power to this Operation (about 2/3rds of their total). It has been clearly inadequate to the task, and has been heavily attrited since. They have already lost more than they did in a decade in Afghanistan, when the Soviet Military was four times the size - which was a Strategic defeat for them. The second half of this war so far has been a significant net loss of territory by Russian forces.
Ethnic Russians and Russian speakers in the East of the Ukraine did not flock to join Russia. They are overwhelmingly fighting and sacrificing to resist that - even in many cases of being tortured to death.
Take a look at your bias, you are making some major errors in assessment.