The interests of Russia and China are far from identical and both sides are fully aware of that fact. In the 1950s the US was absolutely convinced that Mao was a Russian puppet and that Russia would effectively control China. It was inevitable because Russia was a world power and China was a backward third-world country :-). Obviously that is not exactly what happened. During the Cold War Russia and China fought a few pitched battles over the boundaries of central Asia.The book The Bear and The Dragon was fiction, but the military details it contains are not. Those tank unloading points exist, and today tanks are loaded there for shipment to fight in Ukraine. That book was not written in a vacuum. No Russian government is going to sit idle while half their country is hijacked, and if reading the book gives food for thought about the US response, that is probably a good thing at this point.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukrainians-ri...00602.html
Some good thoughts on the state of Ukrainian mechanization efforts. I unsurprisingly like his take on the Ukrainian mechanized infantry situation. It is difficult to understate how hard it is to create a military formation "from scratch" using unfamiliar foreign equipment and tactics. Ukraine has done a lot along those lines, and the next "offensive" may be asking them to do a lot more. It is very, very difficult. There have also been some statements recently by both US and NATO "principals" indicating that Ukraine really has to succeed in their next effort. A good example:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/czech-pre...29476.html
I believe it is imperative that the US start creating the groundwork for what must be done in case Ukraine can't do this. As previously noted, generating an armored division (or even brigade) from nothing in a few months is real, real, difficult. Ukraine was supposed to be doing this last summer but it didn't happen. I don't know the "whys" of it, but it may be that NATO was unwilling to do the training and supply the IFVs/Tanks necessary. If that is the case, it is on us, not Ukraine. That isn't the case now, but it may take more time than many are willing to give Ukraine. That can't happen. When the US and NATO got into this thing, we married our credibility to Ukraine's success. We must ensure said success, come what may.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.yahoo.com/news/ukrainians-ri...00602.html
Some good thoughts on the state of Ukrainian mechanization efforts. I unsurprisingly like his take on the Ukrainian mechanized infantry situation. It is difficult to understate how hard it is to create a military formation "from scratch" using unfamiliar foreign equipment and tactics. Ukraine has done a lot along those lines, and the next "offensive" may be asking them to do a lot more. It is very, very difficult. There have also been some statements recently by both US and NATO "principals" indicating that Ukraine really has to succeed in their next effort. A good example:
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/czech-pre...29476.html
I believe it is imperative that the US start creating the groundwork for what must be done in case Ukraine can't do this. As previously noted, generating an armored division (or even brigade) from nothing in a few months is real, real, difficult. Ukraine was supposed to be doing this last summer but it didn't happen. I don't know the "whys" of it, but it may be that NATO was unwilling to do the training and supply the IFVs/Tanks necessary. If that is the case, it is on us, not Ukraine. That isn't the case now, but it may take more time than many are willing to give Ukraine. That can't happen. When the US and NATO got into this thing, we married our credibility to Ukraine's success. We must ensure said success, come what may.