It’s as if Russia army has enough of one type of system and wants more of a new variant. But here you are making leaps of logic based on that.

That is completely irrelevant to the cost argument that you contested. Stay on topic.

Excuse me, the destruction of infrastructure and logistics has no cost? Try to put at least a bit of effort into your trolling to make it less obvious.

I did a deep dive into it here https://dialecticaldispatches.substack.com/p/the-great-unwind

Except that Russia never said three days, you’ll find no statement from any Russian official saying anything of the sort. The whole narrative came from General Milley during an interview with Fox News, where it was presented as a rough estimate of what American forces might do. The fact that you didn’t even know this basic fact shows how utterly unequipped you are to have this discussion.

So all in all, you’re an utter ignoramus who is unable to engage with reality, and there’s no point trying to have a discussion with you. Hilarious that in your attempt to dodge the question, you revealed yourself as a clown. Life must be hard for somebody of your intellectual stature. I’m truly sorry.

NATO military doctrine is basically obsolete now.

I very clearly referred to the question from the earlier comment. I’m sorry that I didn’t account for the fact that you can’t even hold as much context as a chatbot.

Russian army is very obviously using both types of Pantsir. I don’t know if you were aware, but armies don’t just stock up one variant of the weapon.

And, again, Ukraine has empty shelves now, its only access to sea blocked off, large numbers of gas stations destroyed, and rail system being decimated. Pretty much every strike Russia does, which happen on far bigger scale, hits because Ukraine has no effective AD at this point as Ukrainians themselves admit. So, let’s apply the same logic in reverse. If Ukraine is costing more for Russia in AD than it costs Ukrainians to attack, then what is it costing Ukraine having no AD in aftermath of much larger Russian attacks. Try to think really hard about this.

I’m not being obtuse at all, do feel free to engage with the question I asked though.

Oh Fedorov was dismissed too.

Guns are very much effective against large and slow drones that Ukraine sends into Russia. There are tons of videos of them being shot down by guns. It sounds like you’re really out of your depth here. You also dodged my question here.

No, Pantsir also has guns for close range interceptions, and you’ve just walked back your original claim by an order of magnitude. But even if we take your 200k number, how would you say that compares to not having AD at all which is the case in Ukraine? Do you think it’s worse having all your infrastructure destroyed or better, if it is a matter of attrition which side do you think is coming out ahead here?

In practice Russia uses Pantsir https://odin.t2com.army.mil/WEG/Asset/96K6_Pantsir-S1_(SA-22_Greyhound)_Russian_Short-Range_Air_Defense_Gun::Missile_System which has point defences rather than just using missiles. Russia has also developed Yolka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yolka_(drone_interceptor) interceptor drones. Also, cost of production in Russia is far lower than it is in the west. What you’re reading in your link is projection, their analysis is based on what’s happening to yanks in the war on Iran. Anybody who thinks Russia uses S300/400 or Buk systems to intercept drones is not engaging with reality.

Do provide citations to substantiate the claim that Russia is spending more on air defence than the west is on drones. Meanwhile, if you want to see actual economic war of attrition then go look at what Russian missiles are doing to infrastructure in Ukraine where there are no air defences. For example, around 70% of imports and exports went through Odessa which is now blockaded. And Ukrainian warehouses are being systematically eliminated. https://dengi.ua/en/business/9761324-russian-strikes-on-warehouses-how-the-war-is-reshaping-ukraine-s-logistics

AP buries the lede as usual:

It’s an expensive and time-consuming way to wage war since only 5% to 9% of what Ukraine fires gets past Russian air defenses, according to Watling.

The US has been carefully cultivating a political culture in Europe that’s rooted in Russophobia all throughout the Cold War. So, this isn’t a surprise, and since Europeans know they can’t fight Russia on their own, they have to swallow whatever humiliation the US imposes on them as a result.

Who would fight this war exactly given that all of Europe is entirely dependent on American weapons. What’s gonna happen is that the US will annex Greenland and the Europeans will swallow another humiliation from daddy.

I love how there’s always a relevant RAND paper, it’s like the xkcd for US foreign policy 🤣

Nobody is talking about two wrongs making a right here except you. Pretending this is accidental is the height of dishonesty however, given that this is a well documented pattern now. The only thing I’m suspicious off here are people like you carrying water for a literal fascist regime.

Weird how you ignore the fact that the AFU uses civilians as meatshields, which itself is a war crime https://kyivindependent.com/zelensky-reveals-details-about-warehouse-explosion-that-rocked-kyiv-suburb-promises-dismissals-at-ukraines-largest-weapons-manufacturer/

Civilians die in wars, this isn’t what the discussion is about. The discussion here is about the fact that Ukraine is deliberately targeting civilians having transitioned firmly into territory of doing terrorism. Of course, being an artless troll that you are, you would ignore that fact.

This is precisely what the fascists in Europe want to see happening:

During a press conference held by Vladimir Zelensky and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic in Belgrade, Martens posed a provocative question about what European nations could do to “help kill more Russians.” In response, an online petition was launched calling for the journalist’s removal from his post.

https://tass.com/politics/2171035