What has this general said that makes you doubt his credibility? That he admires the Russian army is purely from an military academic perspective because he is

What has this general said that makes you doubt his credibility? That he admires the Russian army is purely from an military academic perspective because he is a general and studies warfare. And he clearly understands the strength and weakness of the Russian army, and thus is not swayed by propaganda from both the west and the Russians. What does he actually say? He starts out by outlining Russian tactics that they have used in the past (WW2) and how it has evolved to the present day (as apparent in Syria). He then points out how Russia has deviated from it during their incursion into Ukraine. He points out how Russian intelligence failure (to gauge the right mood of Ukrainians) resulted in the Russian army's failure to achieve their goals quickly. He points out how the Ukrainian army has successfully resisted the Russian onslaught. He points out how the Ukrainian could have actually been more successful if the west had supplied them with the right arms and ammunition the Ukrainian army has been demanding all along. He further points out why Russia has been failing - mainly because of the brave resistance of the Ukranian, deviating from their standard tactics and the shortage of men it has committed. He also criticises Putin of micro-managing the war in the early stages. He highlights how a Russian general successfully achieved the military goals he had been ordered to do so because he deviated from orders and used standard Russian tactics. He also points out that Russia will not win this war if Russians don't commit more men to this war and if the Ukranian get the right weapons. And look at what has happened since he made this analysis - the west has supplied the Ukranians with more weapons (don't know if it is the "right" weapons though) and Russia has ordered draft to commit even more men to this war.