[Goose]

Goose, what are the chances the 3rd army corps ends up supplying Ukraine with a lot of nice modern military equipment, with out of immense proportions losses for Ukraine?  It would be nice for Ukraine, that's for sure.

Lots of videos past few days of happy Ukrainian soldiers toting away IFVs, guns, rockets and ammo from overrun positions in Kherson and near Kharkiv. The Russians are abandoning a LOT of kit.

We know the 3rd army corps has lots of "modern" Russian kit, because Ukraine and others have been kind enough to post photos of the trains carrying it towards Ukraine. We also know that many of the troops in the alleged "corps" are new recruits, and that it doesn't have nearly the manning that a "corps" should have. That would tend to indicate Ukraine could indeed gather a windfall if they engage it.
That said, it is historically bad luck to assume your opponent can't or won't fight. Anybody can get victory disease. If it were me I would assume the third corps is smaller than some but may actually be quite good. When Ukraine gets intelligence that they aren't very good, that can change.

---

I believe the phrasing indicates the training was not in the U.S.  I think he was using that reference as a familiar date, to point out it was shortly before the first attack on the Russian ship.

You could be correct, but here is the problem:

“We got them off the ship, put them on some flatbed trucks, put the Harpoons, the modules on the flatbed truck, and then a different flatbed truck for the power source, connected a cable between it, figured out was exportable, brought the Ukrainians to train on it over Memorial Day weekend, in our country, over Memorial Day weekend, and the next week two Russian ships were sunk with those Harpoons,” he said.

This is a nice step-by-step of what we did. Each step is somewhat meticulously spelled out. What's missing? Right after they "figured out it was exportable", they could have easily added "We then exported it" or words to that effect. They didn't say that, which is totally out of keeping with the detailed rest of the statement. The statement "brought the Ukrainians to train on it" is there instead. As originally stated by the pentagon it certainly makes it sound like the men traveled and not the missile system. It could be just a very poorly organized statement. It also could be the literal truth. I suspect the latter.

There are good reasons to do the training in the US. If problems developed with the system during training, it is lots easier to fix it here instead of there. It is kind of a kludge so there are lots of things that could show up when the Ukrainians try to use it. Again, not to say I know that is what happened, but.....

[Goose]

Goose, what are the chances the 3rd army corps ends up supplying Ukraine with a lot of nice modern military equipment, with out of immense proportions losses for Ukraine?  It would be nice for Ukraine, that's for sure.

Lots of videos past few days of happy Ukrainian soldiers toting away IFVs, guns, rockets and ammo from overrun positions in Kherson and near Kharkiv. The Russians are abandoning a LOT of kit.

We know the 3rd army corps has lots of "modern" Russian kit, because Ukraine and others have been kind enough to post photos of the trains carrying it towards Ukraine. We also know that many of the troops in the alleged "corps" are new recruits, and that it doesn't have nearly the manning that a "corps" should have. That would tend to indicate Ukraine could indeed gather a windfall if they engage it.
That said, it is historically bad luck to assume your opponent can't or won't fight. Anybody can get victory disease. If it were me I would assume the third corps is smaller than some but may actually be quite good. When Ukraine gets intelligence that they aren't very good, that can change.

---

I believe the phrasing indicates the training was not in the U.S.  I think he was using that reference as a familiar date, to point out it was shortly before the first attack on the Russian ship.

You could be correct, but here is the problem:

“We got them off the ship, put them on some flatbed trucks, put the Harpoons, the modules on the flatbed truck, and then a different flatbed truck for the power source, connected a cable between it, figured out was exportable, brought the Ukrainians to train on it over Memorial Day weekend, in our country, over Memorial Day weekend, and the next week two Russian ships were sunk with those Harpoons,” he said.

This is a nice step-by-step of what we did. Each step is somewhat meticulously spelled out. What's missing? Right after they "figured out it was exportable", they could have easily added "We then exported it" or words to that effect. They didn't say that, which is totally out of keeping with the detailed rest of the statement. The statement "brought the Ukrainians to train on it" is there instead. As originally stated by the pentagon it certainly makes it sound like the men traveled and not the missile system. It could be just a very poorly organized statement. It also could be the literal truth. I suspect the latter.

There are good reasons to do the training in the US. If problems developed with the system during training, it is lots easier to fix it here instead of there. It is kind of a kludge so there are lots of things that could show up when the Ukrainians try to use it. Again, not to say I know that is what happened, but.....