Miles Copeland, III

The official website

Lessons of army design

The NATO forces, the Ukrainian army as well as the Russian army have been designed for defensive purposes. There is a big difference between design for defense and design for offense. In defense one can expect the support of the local population. Supply lines are shorter. In offence everyone of the local population could be a hostile, and most of all there is a big issue of moral. Fighting for one’s home is a major moral booster. The Russian army was NOT built for offense which is why it has become seen as ineffective in its invasion of Ukraine. Zilensky is right; air power is the key. The only reason the Russian army is having any success rests solely with its air power. Eliminate that advantage and a Russian invading army becomes a paper tiger. This fact has not been lost on the Finns nor the Swedes. NATO provides air power and a big reason for joining. Meanwhile it is beginning to dawn on European and US leadership that we are already in a war – AND that we must win it. That means what the US and NATO needs to do is push our supposed allies, Saudi Arabia, UAE, India, Israel, etc and even supposed enemies as Iran, Venezuela to get with the program, supply oil etc or else. I emphasize that THIS SHOULD BE DONE BEHIND THE SCENES; NO SENSE IN EMBARASSING ANYONE PUBLICALLY. Its all hands on deck time. Lets remember what What Churchill said 70 years ago. “If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.”

%d bloggers like this: