Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)

TheRomanSlayer said:
The frightening scenario is that if the Budjak area is taken, that puts Russia within the range of not only Moldova, but Romania and Bulgaria as well.
Click to expand...
Russia isn't going into Romania or Bulgaria. Once they hit the border, it only becomes a question of timing for when they grab the Russian controlled bit of Moldova though.

Russia invading a NATO country is just as much a redline at the moment as NATO deploying military forces into Ukraine/against Russia.

If Russia is prepared to eat the economic & diplomatic damage, they will be allowed to grab off Ukraine and that bit of Moldova (and no, Moldova won't be allowed into NATO before that). But Russia won't be allowed to go further.

While Russia would like to also grab off Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia; they probably get bogged down enough in Ukraine to not make the attempt.

If Russia moves past Moldova towards Romania or Bulgaria, Turkey will move North to defend them even if no one else will. Turkey very much does not want to share a border with Russia.

The Baltic states aren't going to be allowed into NATO, but they absolutely will be given trainers and military equipment sufficient to make a future Russian attack into another quagmire. EDIT: 3 AM posting makes one stupid.
 
Last edited:
Emperor Tippy said:
Is Graham's statement accurate? Yes.

One of the only truly viable paths for this to end "peacefully" is for Putin to be removed from the equation and then for the west to take the opportunity to tell Russia that if their troops leave, all will be forgiven and we can just forget that this whole thing happened.

Is Graham making that statement fucking stupid? Yes.

A ranking US Senator calling for the assassination of a foreign head of state is not a good thing. Especially when the US isn't even at war with Russia (at least nominally).


No, they really can't. Where do you think all of this magical excess agriculture is located?

We saw what happened the last time the Russian wheat supply was interrupted. Prices doubled or tripled and as a direct consequence we got the Arab Spring.

And that was a situation where the interruption was relatively mildy and relatively brief AND when the global fertilizer markets were just fine.

Now? You are talking about a larger shortage, higher transport costs, and global fertilizer shortages at the same time.

All of those farms in Brazil and Africa and Australia? They all RELY on fertilizer to grow effectively. There are three broad categories of fertilizer; Potash based, Nitrate based, and Phosphate based. 40% of the Potash comes from Russia and Belarus - its no longer available. China is the largest supplier of phosphate based and it has effectively cut off all exports. Nitrate based comes largely from natural gas and the rising prices of that input have jacked up the price (not to mention that most of the supply is already spoken for).

And let's say that Russia is magically willing to supply all of this. What are they getting paid in? Russia won't accept dollars because they can't use them.

Real life isn't a video game where you can just click a button and a product gets spit out.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Fertilizer, and lean hogs, are the new big tech.
Coal,probably as well.

Also, the Russian central bank and financial ministry have said that they will purchase Russian equities, in effect doing a partial,soft nationalization now that they are sold on bargain basement prices.

Russia just might implement capital controls as well and the oligarch class will now have to invest its money in Russia and other friendly countries.

Tactically the economic situation is bad for them but strategically Russia is getting what they want,and one analysis says they need about 6 months to kick the adverse effects of the sanctions.

TheRomanSlayer said:
The frightening scenario is that if the Budjak area is taken, that puts Russia within the range of not only Moldova, but Romania and Bulgaria as well.
Click to expand...
Good, in Bulgaria we will welcome them as liberators, like we did 144 years and one day ago. 😂 :ROFLMAO:
(VIDEO) Bulgarian PM was Booed and Hit with Snowballs at Shipka during Celebrations of Liberation Day - Novinite.com - Sofia News Agency

My biting sarcasm aside,you are delusional if you think that there will be any further expansion.
Transnistria might join Russia and there is a very slight chance
 
What strange circumstances it is that so many who are normally level-headed and reasonable have taken leave of their senses, and ATP is actually one of the few people to actually talk some sense in this conversation. :sneaky:
 
Chiron said:
Contrast US plans which rely on everyone not fucking up and thus unable to adapt operationally when fuckups do occur. When fighting 3rd world militias its survivable for the most part. When fighting an industrial state, its an utter disaster.
Click to expand...

Could you give us some examples of this?
Or are you speaking theoretically?
 
Bacle said:
Click to expand...

Makes sense. The current observation is that Russian military has a massive problem with corruption related rot outside of few expeditionary units, and beyond that, organizational issues.
Meanwhile, the separatists have undergone... natural selection with a major (for them) war and years of skirmishing, similarly to Ukrainians themselves.
 
Scottty said:
Could you give us some examples of this?
Or are you speaking theoretically?
Click to expand...

Helmand Province for one, US forces consistently made big sweeps through it, Taliban largely avoided battle, waited for ANA to come in, defeated and routed ANA Forces and turn whatever tactical successes gained into operational failures with nothing to show for it. No amount of arguing changes the fact ANA was trained and equipped by the US and utterly fell apart due to internal corruption the US Military did fuck all to correct.

Same thing would happen in Iraq till Iran came in and overhauled their officers corps and put officers willing to fight in charge. So the Iraqi Military today is actually the product of Iranian training, because all the US trained forces basically ran away from ISIS. No amount of blaming Maliki changes the fact that the US placed Maliki in charge and were the ones training his Army.

Russian Mentality is everyone is fucking incompetent and a drunk, so incorporate it into the planning assumptions and adjust the force ratios to compensate. In effect weaponize the incompetence to draw the enemy into futile local counter-attacks that fritter away their strength so more competent troops can then pocket and destroy them.

Which brings us back to square 1: Who has so far won their wars? Putin's Russia or the US?

Answer: Not the US, they have nothing to show for their wars. Meanwhile Russia is partying in the bases we abandoned in North Eastern Syria, drinking our beer, reading our books, screwing our YPG mistresses, and trying to woo our Turkish Wife into divorcing us.

Mayhaps its time to stop drinking the US Military's Kool-Aide look at the actual results of all these wars and begin the process of firing US Military Officers for failure to perform and replace them with Officers who can win wars and stop making excuses.
 
ATP said:
NATO warmongers? really? Historically,NATO always planned defense of their countries,only country which planned invasion was always soviets,and now KGBstan.
And you first say,that west leaders are narcissist morons,and then they would attack? really? narcist do not attack others,they are focused on their own greatnest.

If you truly belive,that Putin feared NATO starting war and use H bombs,then you must take him for idiot.
And he is not idiot,becouse KGB take only intelligient psychos,not dumb ones.
Click to expand...
What do you think NATO is, exactly? It's been involved in several invasions; most recently into Afghanistan and Iraq.



Captain X said:
What strange circumstances it is that so many who are normally level-headed and reasonable have taken leave of their senses, and ATP is actually one of the few people to actually talk some sense in this conversation. :sneaky:
Click to expand...
Or, and hear me out; maybe the fact that you think he's talking sense might mean you're not the one being level-headed and reasonable here.
 
Terthna said:
What do you think NATO is, exactly? It's been involved in several invasions; most recently into Afghanistan and Iraq.




Or, and hear me out here; maybe the fact that you think he's talking sense might mean you're not the one being level-headed and reasonable here.
Click to expand...
NATO members were involved, but those were NEVER NATO operations. NATO is a defensive alliance, not a offensive alliance. The coalition in both of those had more then NATO members.
 
Zachowon said:
NATO members were involved, but those were NEVER NATO operations. NATO is a defensive alliance, not a offensive alliance. The coalition in both of those had more then NATO members.
Click to expand...
Officially it's a defensive alliance; kinda like how America has officially never declared war since World War 2, and so technically Afghanistan and Iraq weren't invasions, but rather "peacekeeping missions". If I were a betting man, I wouldn't bet on Putin being worried about an invasion by NATO; I'd bet on him being worried about a "peacekeeping mission" conducted by members of NATO.
 
Terthna said:
Officially it's a defensive alliance; kinda like how America has officially never declared war since World War 2, and so technically Afghanistan and Iraq weren't invasions, but rather "peacekeeping missions". If I were a betting man, I wouldn't bet on Putin being worried about an invasion by NATO; I'd bet on him being worried about a "peacekeeping mission" conducted by members of NATO.
Click to expand...
Which is ridiculous, though not as ridiculous as it was before Russian army humiliated itself.
If NATO was in business of launching "peacekeeping missions" against nuclear powers, North Korea and Pakistan would have been history, and Russia would be somewhat justified to use these arguments.
But as things stand those are completely ridiculous. Those two are waaaay easier to counter-force than Russia, and conventionally weaker at the same time, while being on the west's shitlist since decades, especially North Korea, being the #1 on all the international shitlists.
 
Marduk said:
Which is ridiculous, though not as ridiculous as it was before Russian army humiliated itself.
If NATO was in business of launching "peacekeeping missions" against nuclear powers, North Korea and Pakistan would have been history, and Russia would be somewhat justified to use these arguments.
But as things stand those are completely ridiculous. Those two are waaaay easier to counter-force than Russia, and conventionally weaker at the same time, while being on the west's shitlist since decades, especially North Korea, being the #1 on all the international shitlists.
Click to expand...
It's only ridiculous until it happens. Keep in mind, our political leaders here in America apparently have to be reminded that Russia is actually a nuclear power, and they haven't exactly have the best track record for smart decisions as of late.
 
I wonder how secure Sweden would be outside of NATO if Russia hypothetically did have a boner in wanting to conquer it but Finland was in NATO. There'd be no direct land access which could make things tricky

Having a "neutral" country like Sweden can have benefits in the world order.
 
Terthna said:
Officially it's a defensive alliance; kinda like how America has officially never declared war since World War 2, and so technically Afghanistan and Iraq weren't invasions, but rather "peacekeeping missions". If I were a betting man, I wouldn't bet on Putin being worried about an invasion by NATO; I'd bet on him being worried about a "peacekeeping mission" conducted by members of NATO.
Click to expand...
Uh...no Iraq was am invasion.
It was a coalition of nations.
Nit NATO. Agaun, unless middle eastern countries are now part of NATO
 
bintananth said:
You should should take a look at the gasoline prices in Norway if you think $10US/gal would be a problem. Norway exports oil and the price you pay for gasoline at a filling station in Norway is "yes" in the "if you have to ask, you can't afford it" sense.
Click to expand...
In the EU we have massive taxes on gasoline.
Observe: Germany gasoline prices, 28-Feb-2022 | GlobalPetrolPrices.com
7.718 USD a gallon.

France is actually even worse, btw:
www.globalpetrolprices.com

France gasoline prices, 22-Apr-2024 | GlobalPetrolPrices.com

We show Octane-95 gasoline price data for France from 2014-05-12 to 2024-04-22. The average gasoline price during that period is EUR 1.52 per liter with a minimum of EUR 1.23 on 2016-03-07 and a maximum of EUR 2.12 on 2022-06-06.
www.globalpetrolprices.com www.globalpetrolprices.com

7.734 Gallon.

You have at at least 20% VAT as well as whatever extra charges for gasoline apply.


The Netherlands has the highest gas tax in the European Union, at €0.79 per liter ($3.53 per gallon). Italy is second, at €0.73 per liter ($3.26 per gallon), followed by Finland and Greece, both at €0.70 per liter ($3.12 per gallon).

You’ll find the lowest gas tax in Bulgaria, at €0.36 per liter ($1.61 per gallon), followed by Hungary (€0.38 per liter or $1.70 per gallon), and Poland (€0.39 per liter or $1.74 per gallon).

TL;DR FUCK THE EUSSR!!!!!!!!!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top