So for the second time in a week, Colonel Douglas Macgregor is on Redacted absolutely slaughtering Trump about the Ukraine deal. As usual, talking up how great the Russians are. Disappointed as I liked this guy, maybe this is why he is not in the cabinet. Now saying no one gets appointed by Trump unless Israel approves.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (20)
sorted by:
It is strange to me how people can be so binary about things. The Russians are not good guys and they are not bad guys, they're' just guys. Countries are not moral actors.
Russia is not weak, and they are also not insurmountably strong. They have strengths and weaknesses.
Macgregor takes things to an absurd extreme, suggesting that Russia would slaughter the NATO on the battlefield.
Well, judging by the Kursk adventure (75000 dead, so far) the Russians (and NorKs) are in the process of slaughtering NATO on the battlefield - so yes. It prolly was not a good strategy to poke the bear. Akshully. Just imagine a Lithuanian battalion trying to enter near St Petersburg - yes they would get slaughtered - just because they are little and Russia is big, sorry.
The reason McGregor is doing that pro-Russian sounding narrative, IMO, is because there seems to be an echo-chamber of Ukraine-can-still-win, or: Russia-must-not-win mantras floating about, influenced by the likes of Kellogg and the post-Biden factions in Washington. Someone has to sound the alarms.
Also, when analyzing the battle-supply-chain/ casualty stuff, the Russian stats tend to be closer to the truth, yet Washington seems to beleeb the Ukrainian/MI6 narrative, for political reasons.
So, I'll continue to listen to what the colonel has to say, thanks.
There’s a difference between slaughtering half-trained conscripts, and a hodgepodge of foreign fighters, led by Politicians LARPING as Officers. Who are Using Weapons far more advanced than what their doctrine was built around. Versus a professional Army. The Ukrainian Professional Army was mostly expended in the opening months of the war.
So it’s hardly indicative of what would occur with mainline NATO Forces.
And, do we need to find out?
No we do not. The point I was making was it’s not a particularly great comparison to infer what would happen in such a theoretical matchup.
NATO without the US, definitely doomed