Russia(gate/bot) Russia-Ukraine War Political Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

AnimalNoodles

Well-known member
Why were they vulnerable? Why would Russians with all the supposedly common and advanced tech and artillery superiority and world class air defense be unable to make it not so vulnerable, like it was in earlier months?

HIMARS of course. There was always the potential for HIMARS to damage the bridges or the dam, and the Ukrainians tried mightily to do so.
 

mrttao

Well-known member
Yeah, pathetic. Just like "freedom fries".
the most annoying part about this is... I liked the idea of stealing the french's food. It is the only thing they have going for them. And we just take it.
But no, we gotta pretend it isn't french. and do so in the most cringe manner possible.

Couldn't you just call it "Potato Fries" because it is made of potato? (and leaves the door open for other things like Batata Fries)
 

Husky_Khan

The Dog Whistler... I mean Whisperer.
Founder
Sotnik
the most annoying part about this is... I liked the idea of stealing the french's food. It is the only thing they have going for them. And we just take it.
But no, we gotta pretend it isn't french. and do so in the most cringe manner possible.

Couldn't you just call it "Potato Fries" because it is made of potato? (and leaves the door open for other things like Batata Fries)

Batata Fries?
 

ATP

Well-known member
Question, if he was showing pro-Ukraine sentiment would he be working for the CIA? Just to ensure things are neutral and fair?
Since USA from beginning of war did evrytching they could to not help Ukraine too much,i doubt.
CIA agents would be dudes who say do not help them too much.Like myself.
But,sadly,i am not CIA agent,snif,snif.

And,@AnimalNoodles do not show pro-soviet sentiment,but soviet style propaganda.That is why i asked for soviet sources about ukrainian evil spirits.Which he still failed to deliver.
 
Last edited:

ThatZenoGuy

Zealous Evolutionary Nano Organism
Since USA from beginning of war did evrytching they could to not help Ukraine too much,i doubt.
CIA agents would be dudes who say do not help them too much.Like myself.
But,sadly,i am not CIA agent,snif,snif.
They've given them quite a lot of equipment though. Mossad then lmao.
 

LordsFire

Internet Wizard
Its quite simple. Until recently Russia was considerably outnumbered.

In the late summer and fall, it was dramatically outnumbered. Ukraine had just completed reforming its army with mass conscription and weapon transfers, and Russias army had diminished from a large number of contract soldiers going home after their contracts ended.

As a result, Russia withdrew men from places that were secondary to their aims. This allowed Ukraine to surge in the kharkov, which was lightly garrisoned. Which prompted Russia to mobilise its reservists.

Russia didnt withdraw from Kherson due to casualties. The casualty rates were wildly in favour of Russia. They withdrew because Kherson was was becoming logistically untenable. The Ukrainians were placing constant pressure on it. It was too dependant on a vulnerable bridge and thus It was too difficult to keep supplied.

So they pulled out. This allowed Russia to shorten its line and move those units to Bakhmut.

As for why they waited? I dont know. I suspect Russia still hoped to negotiate, or some politics at play we dont know about.

I'll give you this, this explanation is internally consistent.

Buying it still requires you only accept information from Russian propaganda sources, and accordingly is still a complete crock of shit, but it is at least internally consistent.

It does, however, beg another question?

If the Russian military is so mighty, how did it fail to knock Ukraine out with its initial blitz, when Ukraine had not yet mobilized to gain a numerical advantage?
 

ATP

Well-known member
At this point, I wouldn’t believe any numbers about casualties. Ukraine and their allies are all liars, Russia and their allies are all liars, leaks are by their nature questionable. We’re probably not going to know the truth about deaths (civilian or military) for a long time.

Regarding Nordstream, of course the USA blew it up. Everybody with a modicum of common sense and honesty suspected that from the start. As more evidence comes in, now the Hersh story in particular, it only confirms what any reasonable person already knew - that it as the USA and/or our allies.
True,and i wish you would be right about NS.Problem is - USA proved unable to destroy anything since al least Obama times,so i must suspect it.
When Putin succesfully blow 4 houses in Moscov killing more then 300 people to have pretext for war in Czeczenya
And destroyed Kursk submarine using his own stupidity.

So,when i want belive in powerpuff USA,it probably were soviets again.
 

ATP

Well-known member
I think that the USA, despite some incompetence in both our government and military, is more than capable of blowing things up. In fact, it’s more likely that a nation with military resources like the USA were the ones responsible.

As for Russia blowing it up, we’ve been through this all before. I’m open minded about the possibility of Putin arranging a false flag operation to justify some Russian activity. But in this case, that doesn’t make any sense. He could have done any number of false flag actions that would justify some Russian escalation more than this without destroying one of his own most important assets. In fact, what Russian actions has this even justified? Putin would have known that his enemies wouldn’t care about this and would oppose him regardless. He would have known that the Western media would have sad he did it, which they’re saying even now when the USA clearly did it.

When it comes to false flags, I believe that it’s the USA that are the masters of that.

USA Once were masters of technology,but never masters of false flag.It was ALWAYS soviet heritage.And thus why i thing Putin did it.Becouse false flags and spies are ONLY thing they could do right.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder


Ziehan goes over why this war is just in the beginning phase, how the war was always going to happen because of geography and Russian demographics, how Russian's winning in Ukraine is pretty much guaranteed to go nuclear when they begin to push beyond Ukraine, how Russia will continue to attack Ukraine across the border even when they are forced out of Ukrainian lands and resot to nukes when that happens, and how Ukraine winning means Ukraine will have to hit across the border to restrict Russian ability to do the same by knocking out military infrastructre in range of their weapons.

So yeah, there is no way out of this war that is not ugly and a long slog, and either Ukraine win a long slog after pushing the Russians out, or Russia get's what it wants in Ukraine (which is all of it, not just Donbas or Crimea) and then makes moves on the Baltics/Poland.

The is no option for 'peace' here till Russia gives up it's imperial ambitions, because any consessions to Russia will just make them think they could get away with more invasions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATP

Zachowon

The Army Life for me! The POG life for me!
Founder
I saw let Russia try it.
I wanna see them face the true might of NATO.

And as for NORDSTREAM.
Literally the story given makes no sense with how doctrine is for the US
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
I saw let Russia try it.
I wanna see them face the true might of NATO.

And as for NORDSTREAM.
Literally the story given makes no sense with how doctrine is for the US
Russia just views negotiation from the point of view of enabling a build up of forces, when they feel they are doing it from a position of strength, that is plain as day now. The also are facing a demographic crunch that means they won't have enough bodies to even defend their current borders, unless they expand to the geographic choke points they have pursued historically.

So the only way to make the Russia pursue peace with good faith it to make it so they cannot continue their aggression without incurring more losses elsewhere on their defensive periphery.

If Japan wants to move on the Kuriles, it wouldn't be the worst time to do so, with so many Far East units hollowed out to push a few hundred meters more in the Donbas.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
I just googled it on urban dictionary you are wrong Bacle. You should apologize for calling him a Nazi falsly.
Dude, I had literally never seen that abbreviation anywhere else before seeing it in his sig, and AnimalNoodles has expressed some rather unkind views about the Jewish people in the past, as well as WS/WN bullshit on the regular, while cheering on Russia.

I'm glad the abbreviation wasn't about the Jews, but I won't apologize about what I thought it was initially, given the wider context of AnimalNoodles views.

I'll even go fetch links for evidence, if you want to make something more of this.
 

King Arts

Well-known member
Dude, I had literally never seen that abbreviation anywhere else before seeing it in his sig, and AnimalNoodles has expressed some rather unkind views about the Jewish people in the past, as well as WS/WN bullshit on the regular, while cheering on Russia.

I'm glad the abbreviation wasn't about the Jews, but I won't apologize about what I thought it was initially, given the wider context of AnimalNoodles views.

I'll even go fetch links for evidence, if you want to make something more of this.
Yes, links would be nice. Because here is the thing calling people things when you have no proof of it is not nice and is against the rules. I don't know anything about AnimalNoodles. But just assuming something is a racist term when you don't know what it is is wrong. It's literal sjw behavior. If you don't know what it is you should ask.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top