I usually find this guy has a good take on things.
Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)
- Thread starter ParadiseLost
- Start date
Conversely...
Sad that KiwiFarms is defunct. His thread was good reading. 😔
Scary stuff though.
It seems that NATO supplied weapons clearly enabled this in spite of the Russians regularly intercepting 80% of all of the Western Equipment shipped to Ukraine over these past six months. Imagine if Ukraine was equipped with more than a scant fraction of the weapons sent them.
Let's just say this is not looking good for Russia.
Remember all the shills saying Russia was winning the war? Yeah. At this rate, the Ukrainians may be able to actually spear into Russia itself eventually.
Remember all the shills saying Russia was winning the war? Yeah.
At this rate, the Ukrainians may be able to actually spear into Russia itself eventually.
I think this is the result you get when you randomly conscript people into your military and then don't train them.
A good pro-Ukrainian Twitter account:
He's likely the same person as AP on the Unz Review.
He's likely the same person as AP on the Unz Review.
Russia's combat reputations officially dies in Ukraine. No one will take their Ground Forces, Navy and Air Force seriously anymore.
Let's just say this is not looking good for Russia.
Remember all the shills saying Russia was winning the war? Yeah.
To be fair they were the 5th largest army in the world, and had fought in previous wars and thus should have been a battle hardened force up against relative novices. There was no way to know they would fuck up basic logistics and so many other things.
paulobrito
Well-known member
Georgia - against a small force
Siria - against insurgents
Ukraine (before this) - against a force not supported by NATO
Remember that this fight is against a force with full ELINT/SIGINT support from NATO, financial and military support from NATO, and that received years of training from NATO.
Not exactly the same thing.
Siria - against insurgents
Ukraine (before this) - against a force not supported by NATO
Remember that this fight is against a force with full ELINT/SIGINT support from NATO, financial and military support from NATO, and that received years of training from NATO.
Not exactly the same thing.
Lord Sovereign
The resident Britbong
C O P E
Megadeath
Well-known member
Yeah... But just imagine if they were up against NATO themselves? If the weapons NATO can afford to give away and some technical support can allow Ukraine to straight up beat Russia, imagine how much worse they'd have done against a multinational alliance, using all their best stuff in relatively huge numbers, trained to a much greater degree and designed to work together, with extensive and deep planning for just such an eventuality.
paulobrito
Well-known member
Badly, sure.
But that has the risk of going nuclear, something nobody is interested. And remember - Russia is not the old Soviet Union, don't have the numbers anymore. You see that part - not having the numbers - in this conflict.
Yeah and a bunch of milatary people had the exact same thought you had in a major war we would cream russia. Then they had a drink went to bed and then woke up the next day and realized.
Oh shit in a major war we would cream russia, and realized that a nato Russian conflict became a lot more likely to go nuclear this is why there has been a paniced effort to get Ukriane all of the money, training, weapons and intel they can get and the absolutely crazed level of sanctions.
The idea is to destroy the russian milatary in the Ukraine and fight to the very last Ukranian if need be to make it happen.
Megadeath
Well-known member
When you say "Fight to the last Ukrainian" you make it sound like they're being cynically used, and that belittles them. They've chosen to fight for their freedom and self determination, and I applaud them for that, and also the countries that have supported them in that fight. For sure they almost unanimously have reasons for that support beyond it being the right thing to do, but that doesn't change that it is a fundamentally good and just thing, nor that it wouldn't be possible if they weren't interested in enthusiastically defending themselves to start with.
But, yeah as you and @paulobrito said, a Russia/NATO war is way more likely to go nuclear, and that would be horrendous. Even if the logistics, maintenance and quality issues that have effected the rest of the Russian war machine apply to their nuclear forces (And I think it's likely that they are far less impacted.) they have the capacity to make a NATO "victory" a shitty situation for the rest of the world. But... So what? The point is they can't get away with unreasonable diplomatic dick swinging, because the big stick of their military isn't hanging so scarily in the background. Sure they could go full NK and just threaten to nuke everyone they don't like every second Tuesday, but that just makes them an even more isolated pariah state. It's pretty clear they can't live up to their ambitions even with access to world markets. If they're cut off long term they'll just become increasingly irrelevant.
paulobrito
Well-known member
And if the Russian army is defeated and Russia only has the nukes to defend itself? What do you think happens?
Is a very dangerous game that is played right now.
Is a very dangerous game that is played right now.
paulobrito
Well-known member
Small problem about that 'Russia goes NK' and 'Russia turns irrelevant'.
They have a fuckton of raw resources, and without them, the world market is in very bad shape. Right now, you have a very small demonstration of that.
The US's ultimate plan has always been to defeat Russia and after that dismember it in small nations that can be easily controlled. Russia is too big, too rich (in natural resources), and too independent for the US to tolerate.
This war started long ago, first shots are at least in 2006 - the first time the US/NATO talked about including Ukraine in NATO - if not before when NATO started to advance eastwards.
February 24 of 2022 is just the endgame. Or not.
They have a fuckton of raw resources, and without them, the world market is in very bad shape. Right now, you have a very small demonstration of that.
The US's ultimate plan has always been to defeat Russia and after that dismember it in small nations that can be easily controlled. Russia is too big, too rich (in natural resources), and too independent for the US to tolerate.
This war started long ago, first shots are at least in 2006 - the first time the US/NATO talked about including Ukraine in NATO - if not before when NATO started to advance eastwards.
February 24 of 2022 is just the endgame. Or not.
American steel,and polish intelligence.We cracked Enigma,and we made landing in Africa possible.More then half of "british" intelligience was ours.
Soviet blod - yes,but only becouse they used wave tactics.If they had normal generals,that would not happened.
And,If you remain loyal to germans to the end,paradoxally,it would not hurt you much more,but save part of Europe which was taken by soviets.
Becouse,german dyvisions fighting in Italy was taken from Eastern Front.
But,you are right,that every nation should think first about themselves.And,exactly for that reason,european nations should help Uraine - becouse Putin want control entire Europe,not only Ukraine,baltics or Poland.
Germans are delusional when they think that Moscow would co-rule with them.They would end under yoke when USA leave,and Poland get genocided.
Aaaaaaany day now, just you wait... Aaaaany day...
Megadeath
Well-known member
Ah ha. Ah hahaha... HAHAHAHAHA! In other words, no.