>

It’s so nice of them to be environmentally conscious.
Yea well they're not schools, hospitals or residential apartments so I doubt they can hit them >

It is really impressive that they developed such a niche targeting system to only hit non-combatants.
And to think Ukraine simultaneously designed a system to only target high ranking Russian generals and commanders is really impressive. >

It's a fair strategy on the part of the Ukrainians. 
Take out the officers and the conscripts are now left without direction because Russian doctrine does not give soldiers the autonomy to act unlike American doctrine. 
Basically you kill the officer and everyone is left in a confused mess and you can either take them out or break their morale and make them retreat. >

Most countries' military doctrines don't give their soldiers autonomy. It's one of our biggest advantages. >

It's a difficult strategy though - if the average Russian solider was given any autonomy they'd just go home. >

There is that. Other countries could give themselves a big leg up by adopting our practices, but tradition, and authoritarian countries really don't want to encourage independent thought/action. >

That’s how you get a military coup. >

Must be how Petreus evolved >

I'm surprised they didn't announced their destruction already. >

You're joking, but they did proudly announce the destruction of several Bradley's months before their delivery... >

They said they destroyed the crowd-funded Lithuanian Bayraktar a month before it was due to leave the factory >

They're still claiming to have destroyed more HIMARS than have even been delivered to Ukraine, right? >

Yep. Last time I heard about it they had destroyed twenty seven of them. Only 20 were ever shipped. >

Correct me if I'm wrong but as far as I'm aware they have in fact not destroyed a single HIMARS. >

Both sides are playing the propaganda game. I doubt Ukraine would want to confirm a kill for the Russians. I wouldn't be surprised if a few had been hit given how high priority they must be as targets. >

Both sides may be playing fast and loose with the truth, but it's a little more believable that Russia has destroyed none than that they've destroyed more than were delivered. I want Ukraine to start claiming Russian missiles are just creating duplicates, so now they have more than they did before. >

0 is certainly plausible.
Thing is, even if it was some non-zero number, the Americans are still flying planeloads of rocket pods in.  Even the 20 that Ukraine has is stretching logistics chains along that route to their limits.... any losses would be easily replenished, and a few momentary losses wouldn't have a particularly noteworthy impact on the amount of heat they're sending downrange.
I'm looking forward to seeing a number of NATO folks go on a special logistics vacation into Ukraine.  Get those HIMARS shooting more often. >

With russia have munitions troubles and military reorgs they might be running out of ammo dumps and generals to target >

Russia warns any Challenger tanks sent to Ukraine from Britain 'will burn Russian tanks'
Fixed it >

Alternatively, they "will burn lots of fuel advancing towards the Russian border."