So first look at the source. "Zero Hedge" started out as a fringe economic page that pandered to the typical far right conspiracy theory genre. "Tyler Durden" is not a person, but a nom de plume of any in-house staff writer. Apparently this one has decided to become a military expert. I should note they have taken a position of extreme US isolationism throughout the current conflict. I would not be surprised if Douglas Macgregor or Scott Ritter isn't a regular consultant. They echo the same sort interpretation of "America First" as Revolver and Tucker.
By the way, if you are using these guys for economic news, I would strongly suggest a complimentary subscription to the Wall Street Journal or Barrons.
Yes, NATO - and by that I mean several of the smaller members to include Poland - have rid themselves of Soviet era stocks of tanks and BMPs. Something they have been wanting to do for a couple of decades for modern US or German replacements, but for which there was never any funding. Thanks to Putin's adventurism, those countries have now made those decisions and investments and will soon begin taking delivery of modern IFVs and MBTs. My simple military mind says that is clearly in NATO interests generally, US interests specifically, and to Russia's ever growing detriment.
The US has built over 500 HIMARS and approximately 250 are deployed with US forces. Another subset have been sold through security assistance, but we have plenty in reserve to continue equipping Ukrainian artillery formations. Indeed, all of the equipment we have provided that isn't new production (i.e switchblade, etc) is through Presidential drawdown authority - in other words, drawdown of stocks excess to requirements. Again, rather than strain the force, this provides an opportunity to usefully expend older or excess material.
Munitions are another red herring. Exact numbers of any munition are classified. But let us take MLRS/HIMARS (same ammo) specifically since it seems to incense the "expert" at Hedgefund the most. Unclassified data indicates production in excess of 100,000 missiles. Like any such munition, these have shelf life - usually around a decade. You can be certain that older lots are being provided to Ukraine. Rather than have the first years' of production of these rounds de-milled later this decade, Ukraine is able to de-mill at Russia's growing expense for us. And Lockheed Martin has an up and running line going at full production.
Even if there was a dip in meaningful worst case reserve army stocks, who exactly are we going to be engaging in a multi-Corps land war in the foreseeable future? I mean, Russia seems rather occupied, and I am certain we have no war plan to march on Moscow. And no one has quite come to grips how we get into a major land war with China.
And Russia is going to carry out a winter offensive?!? With what? They have lost somewhere between 60 - 80% (whether you believe Oryx or US DOD) of their modernized tank and IFV force. The internet is full of pictures of ancient T62/64 tanks on rail cars being shipped to the front to be manned one presumes by this mob currently being sent to the front. The evidence is overwhelming that they are being sent with no training, no winter provisions or clothing, no body armor, and many with helmets worn by their grandfathers. Even Russian TV is beginning to express concerns.
So no. I do not believe a meaningful Russian winter offensive is at all likely. Their trained and best equipped force, the one that invaded in February has essentially been destroyed. The capability gap between Ukraine and this newly mobilized mop is growing dramatically. If anyone takes advantage of "General Winter" it will be Ukraine continuing to roll over ever more demoralized depleted remnants of Russia's land forces.
I am convinced that the only way Russia has any way to recover militarily is if we force Ukraine into negotiations too soon. Russia has to be at a point of finding a way to "get out" through negotiations, rather than achieve any objectives.
