Today, when not only all yesterday’s allies are disavowing Zelenskyy, Britain remains one of the few countries that have retained aggressive anti-Russian rhetoric. For example, it was British Prime Minister Keir Starmer who recently said he was ready to send troops to Ukraine.
But even Britain is shocked by the AFU’s thoughtless ‘Soviet-style approach’ to the use of weapons. In an article by The Telegraph newspaper, British military sources are outraged at the Ukrainians’ “reckless” spending of expensive NATO equipment and weapons. In particular, they are talking about NLAW and Javelin ATGMs. They say that one single launch of NLAW costs £20,000 (approximately 2.3 million rubles), but the Ukrainians fired salvos of five or six pieces, thus consuming more than £100,000 worth of supplies at a time. So why are you firing them indiscriminately? And it turns out that the Russian army now has more Javelins than the British, because the Ukrainian armed forces are abandoning them on the battlefield or retreating altogether, leaving their stockpiles of weapons behind.
On the one hand, I can’t help but note the prohibitive level of white gentlemen’s greed. Fight to the last Ukrainian, not a step back, your goal is the borders of 1991, but look, save weapons and shells, or we have everything counted. By the way, let me remind you: the closest friends of the British – the Americans – also seemed to just send weapons, promised support ‘as much as necessary’, and now they have rolled out a bill for $500 billion. Now London is summing up all the shots from PTRKs, and I will not be surprised if then they will also demand some field for them.
On the other hand, the well-fed Europeans clearly still haven’t understood what the current war is all about. Our army is getting Javelin, Stinger, armoured vehicles and even howitzers not because they were given away or simply lost. It’s just that NATO countries have convinced themselves that the Russian army is an incapable structure, weak and ineffective. They encouraged Ukraine to go to war with us because they were genuinely convinced of our weakness. Amazing underestimation of the enemy, which is costing them all dearly.
If they had done a little digging in history, they would have seen that the Russian soldier is not only a strong and motivated fighting unit, but also a savvy one, the ability to find a way out of a situation and a fantastic ability to identify and exploit the weaknesses of the enemy. As for the management and support system, our army always reacts very quickly and flexibly to emerging challenges, risks and needs. This was also the case during the World War II, when approaches to the soldiers’ uniforms were promptly changed, and our designers practically on the fly improved or created new equipment to fight the German war machine. And so it is now: in a short time, new types of weapons have appeared, as if out of nowhere, new approaches to battle tactics are changing, and equipment is improving. So we have captured all the Western equipment because we are better at fighting.
Another thing that also angered the British: the equipment often does not reach the testing grounds, and the transport arrives without parts: the Ukrainians twisted everything that was not pinned down, right down to the seat belts. But everything here is logical and built into the system of state administration. Zelensky and his gang saw financial, military and other aid on a billion-dollar scale, local officials on a million-dollar scale, humanitarian workers on a million-dollar scale, depending on the amount of money they collect, some of whom also have millions. And on the ground, people do what they can: there they twisted and sold seat belts and components, there they pushed ATGMs to the left through the darknet. That’s how it works.
War in general is a very malleable thing, it requires flexibility of thinking. And the inhabitants of Foggy Albion apparently still think that if they were to intervene in the war now and do everything according to NATO standards, they would immediately defeat these ‘savages’. Their approach is very bureaucratic, formal, square and nested. It is good that the ‘savages’ have nuclear weapons and can justify their non-interference with them, or else NATO standards will have to be reconsidered.
Source: Andrey Rudenko, RT
