Sure, my occasional mistake. So the problem is that an American made a minor chronological mistake of Chinese leaders but not about the larger issue of (in)competence at the national leadership level.
Fine. This still does not absolve the Russian military of poor intelligence before invasion. This is a bad way of trying to save face for the Russian military. From the beginning of this war, I have refrained from commenting. I entered this discussion when it was already over 500 pages long. So no one can accuse me of jumping to any conclusion.
From a USAF perspective, the VKS have a shiddy performance over Ukraine. That is my opinion after 3 weeks of war.
The Ukrainian Air Force have about 100 combat jets in FLYABLE or MISSION CAPABLE condition. Was this factoid made to the VKS leadership? If yes, the fact that the Ukrainian Air Force continues to sortie means what and then what does that finally say about the VKS? My refrain from commenting until the two weeks mark is more than reasonable. It is overly generous given what the world seen with Desert Storm and use as example on how a powerful air force should perform and PRODUCE. The VKS failed. Gary is US Army and he pointed out how the Russian Army failed.
The word 'failed' here does not mean Russia cannot conquer Ukraine. It means that the Russian military failed to live up to the image that it cultivated over decades and then when it comes to actually produce results, it failed to produce within the expected time that came with that image of power and competence.
If that is true, then maybe Xi should fire the entire staff just like Poutine did with his. Maybe we will see that later. As long as the Russian military continues to push, eventually it will capture the requisite strategic targets such as the major cities. But there WILL be increasing cost that will repel observers, and in that observers group includes your PLA.
When I was active duty, the USAF have only 60 yrs of aviation history and from limited list of countries to draw upon, whereas the US Army and US Navy have literally thousands of yrs of history spanning continents and cultures. The USAF have a notebook while the US Army and US Navy have a stack of text books. Same situation for the PLA. In that global history, with each war, it is the responsibility of the military's leadership, no matter what country, to study the conditions prior to war and the outcome of that war, then compare against previous wars. The more in-depth the study, the better the analysis for the next war, whenever it might be. I think there is a building call 'military academy' to do this. You might check to see if there is something similar in China. So clearly, the USAF no longer uses WW I and less reliant on WW II. Does the PLA leadership do the same? If not, then in my opinion, Xi should fire the entire staff.
You are making a weak excuse with this 'total war bias' stuff.
