>>64110548
Russia deployed them to the frontlines. Oh, and
>Serbia.
Also let's run a calculation and find the probability of humiliating one of the top three military powers on Earth, no. #1 nuclear giant, then add "rogue," and "minimal loss rate," "pinned enemy forces down with sidearms/melee," "caused morale collapses on the enemy frontline," "survived and still operational," and now your enemy is afraid of you (FSB Alpha Group were scared to even approach Azov's leader in Lefortovo). Say, roughly one battalion and 1 or 2 companies vs 27 tactical battalion groups + an Air Force + a Navy using only infantry and house-to-house. Then throw in it was literally a stalemate - Russia only won tactically. Ukraine still won, even if only strategic. Mostly Azov was all they had. That versus Russian SOF, DNR/LNR insurgents, Akhmat, Wagner PMC Group (who died because of Ukraine and only have 2000 members left), the Russian Air Force and Navy (who had aerial superiority on day one). And distracted them long enough to take Kherson and stalemate the war on a broader scale, to the point that every move you make being high stakes. You saw your own comrades die in front of you. You were the last man standing repeatdly, cannot hold a stable line of defense either. But the last one out every single time (Denys Prokopenko gives me Jack Churchill vibes). I think the only reason Russia agreed with the Saudi deal is because he was causing disruption inside Lefortovo, leading revolts and still fighting. Then take into account the loss rate. One figure said Azov only lost about 315 men and most deaths/captures by the end were marines. Russia lost 7500, and that was as of April 15th. Other sieges (like Vukovar) basically all civilians died off. And add Kinzhal hypersonic missiles which are basically tactical nukes.
