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

Very possibly, Yes. Just like Serbia still hasn't renounced its claim on Kosovo.
Do they want it so bad they want to ethnically cleanse anything Russian too? I'm asking questions like this because while my attention passed over shit going on Ukraine after the Crimea was lost the people there haven't and did their spats leading to shit like the shot down flight MH17 along with other escalations I'm unaware of until the Russians struck first rather than Ukraine.
 
Do they want it so bad they want to ethnically cleanse anything Russian too? I'm asking questions like this because while my attention passed over shit going on Ukraine after the Crimea was lost the people there haven't and did their spats leading to shit like the shot down flight MH17 along with other escalations I'm unaware of until the Russians struck first rather than Ukraine.

I think that Ukraine would have been perfectly content with keeping the status quo indefinitely had Russia not invaded them earlier this year, frankly.
 
I think that Ukraine would have been perfectly content with keeping the status quo indefinitely had Russia not invaded them earlier this year, frankly.
Maybe the common people but not the certain nationalist bunch spoiling for a fight while influencing the government and then there's the government influenced by NATO and the West.
 
bgM5QqMgTmgI.jpeg

Yeah that's totally the same person, you can tell by the 240x480 resolution it's basically like CSi

amazing
Maybe the common people but not the certain nationalist bunch spoiling for a fight while influencing the government and then there's the government influenced by NATO and the West.

the Russian cries out in pain as it invades you with 200,000 men

twice
 
Maybe the common people but not the certain nationalist bunch spoiling for a fight while influencing the government and then there's the government influenced by NATO and the West.

The international monitoring mission recorded like 800 shelling violations by the Ukrainians from January into February alone, the highest rate since the First Donbass War ended in 2015. If they were "peaceful" and willing to accept the status quo, that's an odd thing to do. I've yet to see any of the Ukie boosters be able to explain it.
 
Maybe the common people but not the certain nationalist bunch spoiling for a fight while influencing the government and then there's the government influenced by NATO and the West.

The West probably liked the situation as it was as well. There was no need to include more pro-Russian voters in Ukraine.

the Russian cries out in pain as it invades you with 200,000 men

twice

"Muh, we need Ukraine in order to acquire its human capital! We could acquire more human capital by breeding more, but we, unlike present-day Israeli Jews and our own ancestors, are way too lazy for that!"

I really hope that Russia will lose this war so that Russian nationalism will subsequently evolve in a more Amish-like direction. More pacifism AND more breeding!
 
The international monitoring mission recorded like 800 shelling violations by the Ukrainians from January into February alone, the highest rate since the First Donbass War ended in 2015. If they were "peaceful" and willing to accept the status quo, that's an odd thing to do. I've yet to see any of the Ukie boosters be able to explain it.

How many shelling violations did the Donbass separatists have during the very same time period?
 
the Russian cries out in pain as it invades you with 200,000 men

twice
How much do you know of the Azov battalion?
The international monitoring mission recorded like 800 shelling violations by the Ukrainians from January into February alone, the highest rate since the First Donbass War ended in 2015. If they were "peaceful" and willing to accept the status quo, that's an odd thing to do. I've yet to see any of the Ukie boosters be able to explain it.
That's what I noticed from those commenting on the escalation into the war.
 
They're useful cannon fodder for the West. What exactly should I know about them?
Even useful cannon fodder causes problems if they do things the public would take issue with if they knew. It can be as simple as bullying the local civilians.
 
I'd have to double check, but less and in response to the Ukies; their official report is available online, I'll try to find it.

Well, just how accurate is their official report? That's the crucial question, isn't it?

Even useful cannon fodder causes problems if they do things the public would take issue with if they knew. It can be as simple as bullying the local civilians.

Very true. This was the case for both the Soviet Union in World War II (Western Allied cannon fodder) and Iraqi Shi'a militias in the war against ISIS (Western cannon fodder).
 
"During the war, 297 Tomahawks were fired, of which 282 began their mission successfully (9 failed to leave the tube and 6 fell into the water after leaving the tube). At least 2 (and possibly as many as 6) were shot down, most or all of them in a single quickly arranged stream attack (the missiles had to fly a single mission profile most of the way to their target)." From: "Desert Victory - The War for Kuwait" by Norman Friedman Naval Institute Press 1991.

So a 94% reliability rate versus a 40% reliability rate for Russian munitions.

lol_lmao_scorpion.png
 
Very true. This was the case for both the Soviet Union in World War II (Western Allied cannon fodder) and Iraqi Shi'a militias in the war against ISIS (Western cannon fodder).
You have to consider all the available information even if it's alleged ones to piece it together. I don't have good odds on the Ukranian's success after taking it all in but I'm not the one there getting bombed by artillery or encircled.

I can buy it that Russia has irredentist policies once they took the Crimea while also buying the origins of the Azov battalion influencing the reasons for the "special police action" if you check the bits and pieces of the passive aggressive tit for tat.
One (1) battalion in a war of tens of divisions on each side?

Who gives a shit?
To understand how the war happened. Such ignorance is detrimental to an analyst.
 
I can buy it that Russia has irredentist policies once they took the Crimea while also buying the origins of the Azov battalion influencing the reasons for the "special police action" if you check the bits and pieces of the passive aggressive tit for tat.

Sending Russian troops to the Donbass (which Russia did, right before the start of the war) and also possibly outright annexing the Donbass would have eliminated any threat that Azov might have posed to the Donbass population. There was absolutely no need to invade the rest of Ukraine.
 
Sending Russian troops to the Donbass (which Russia did, right before the start of the war) and also possibly outright annexing the Donbass would have eliminated any threat that Azov might have posed to the Donbass population. There was absolutely no need to invade the rest of Ukraine.
Doesn't that allow Azov to grow and stage more passive aggressive fights like Israel does with the Palestinians?
The people well informed enough to know it's not just a Battalion and hasn't been since 2014.
You're right it's now a regiment. I refer to them as a battalion because that's how I usually remember them as.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top