city to save it, what kind of victory is that? beyond that, they would love to have some real success in the east, and, of course, they re really not achieving all that much. they re getting grinding, grudging success there, the ukrainian soldiers giving up a bit of ground in some areas, but by and large this massive armor defensive that many anticipated just has not materialized. and i think it is once again a sign of the ineptitude, frankly, rushed forces that were withdrawn to belarus, pushed people and equipment into them, plussed them back up and brought them all the way around and shoved them in. and it just is not going according to their plan. they are achieving combined arms effects of armor as well as infantry engineers, artillery mortars, certainly not getting air ground integration the way we with want to see it real close air support. they re just bombing out there. and, again, i don t think that despite all of the forces that they have massed that they re going to achieve
everyone whenever anyone is throwing out numbers, you have to keep something in mind that the number of combat troops that are literally engage edd in combat operations on the front lane whether they re infantry engineers, aviation whatever there s usually about a 3 to 1 ratio. if you do the math you re only at 5,000 to 7,000 real involved combat troops where everyone else is that pail that goes behind it, the support, the medical. when you hear that 20,000 you have to put it in perspective. even if you cut that number down, they still have a 2-1 advantage over the enemy. how is that playing out on the ground? what are you seeing? anytime the enemy has months to prepare themselves the enemy has an advantage especially in a place like tikrit which is the city. i ve been very impressed with what the iraqi forces led by the paramilitary forces have done