While this article is hilariously misleading, it is better than most pro-Russian trolling. Moreover, some of the points are in fact correct: NATO has indeed been far too complacent, and the ability of NATO countries to ramp up (or even sustain) production of essential weapons systems is woefully inadequate. Indeed, NATO complacency over the last 30 years has led to a situation where Germany doesn't even have sufficient ammunition to permit its very modest army to practice live-fire drills. The UK, meanwhile, is a joke - spending far too much on a completely pointless navy while continually degrading its capabilities on land and in the air.

But... despite the risible claims made in the article about the "superiority" of the T-90, it's a piece of junk. Despite the claims about the Russian military's ability to coordinate in a grand strategy, it's a shambles. And unlike NATO personnel, the Russian military is mostly comprised of a mixture of resentful poorly-trained and ill-equipped drunks whose primary motivations are (i) to do as little as possible, and (ii) to loot as much as possible. Its officer corps is full of kleptomaniacs, and its leadership is - to be charitable - not overly competent. Its command-and-control systems are decades behind the West. That said, the article is correct in its assertion that Russia can use bodies to wear down opponents, and it's certainly true that NATO continues to be far too timorous and slow to act, giving Russia an enormous advantage so that even its rabble-in-uniform can wreak destruction upon Ukraine while the West continues to do far too little, far too late.

Russia may yet defeat Ukraine and impose a puppet regime in Kyiv because of NATO stupidity and political weakness; but that result won't be because Russia is superior to NATO. It will be because Western "leaders" are spineless halfwits incapable of seeing an existential threat standing right in front of their faces.