The Ukrainians are better trained, theyre just having problems with the fact that the Russians are using unique technology like "mines" and "planes".
The Ukrainians are better trained, theyre just having problems with the fact that the Russians are using unique technology like "mines" and "planes".
Russians are employing this dastardly new technology called "mines" which no army on earth has encountered before, least of all those of the NATO members like France, Germany and the UK.
You're viewing a single thread.
Where’s the evidence that the Ukrainian soldiers have better training? Blind assumption that Western training is inherently superior?
It's because their training is higher quality, more extensive and better. It's just doing worse because they don't know how to fight the Russians, which they are trained better than they're just doing worse because the Russians are fighting in a way they're not trained to fight, they're trained to fight in a better way which is doing worse against the Russians because they're fighting differently which is worse than the way the Ukrainians are fighting which are doing worse because they're having issues with...
They say Russian POWs are complaining about lack of training, though they of course provide no source for this except for a general handwave of "plenty of interviewed." Others have posted a lot of different sources (with references!) which claim the Ukrainians are generally ill-equipped and barely-trained.
Their response? Ridiculous, the Russians can't be better trained than the Ukrainians because thebUkrainians are trained better than the Russians.They say Russian POWs are complaining about lack of training, though they of course provide no source for this except for a general handwave of "plenty of interviewed." Others have posted a lot of different sources (with references!) which claim the Ukrainians are generally ill-equipped and barely-trained.
this is why you should never take much stock from what POWs say while in their enemy's custody. from neither Ukrainian nor Russian POWs. It's easy to be like "oh, but they should know! they're first-hand witnesses of what they're talking about!" and that can be true but there's no way of knowing if they've been threatened to say what they said, or if their words have been taken out of context, etc.
If a thousand POWs say nothing, but a single one says "Oh yeah, the Russian/Ukrainian Army actually is doing these horrific acts, I totes saw them doing it, they ordered me to do it, and uhh they're about to collapse!" then that singular opinion will be shouted from the rooftops and it will be generalized and taken as gospel by the opposing side. Propaganda is about emphasising certain facts or opinions over others, even if those certain facts or opinions are held by a tiny minority and are patently false.
Also there's an inverse survivorship bias going on here.
The least trained troops are going to be the most likely to be captured so what statements they make is going to be reflected by whatever the weaknesses happen to be that were contributing factors to them being captured.
They got overrun? Those who are captured are very likely to complain about lack of numbers and lack of support.
They were completely outmatched by better trained forces who used better tactics? Those who are captured are very likely going to complain about lack of training.
Their supply lines were interrupted? They're almost certainly going to complain about a lack of supply.
Never underestimate that those who are captured are probably going to be engaging in some degree of cope.
What you hear in the western narrative is largely shaped by all the strengths of the Ukrainian side and all the deficits of the Russian side (and these often get exaggerated and even universalised). But it's unusual to have much focus on the Ukrainian deficits and the Russian strengths.
Their reserve conscripts are no match for our army of forced volunteers!