Moonbox

and what about the will of the people in Russia? Nevermind, I forgot. Putin has 89% approval rating, everyone loves the special military operation, Russia's soldiers are super motivated and are happy their lives are wasted frivolously. The country is not driving itself even deeper into an accelerating demographic decline either. Everything is GREAT. 🙄

You've already decided on a narrative, and you're going to ignore all evidence and reasoning that contradicts it. See: They're not. You've looked at the maps, and to see these "steady advances" (measured in meters) you have to zoom the map in to the point where you see individual houses. The best part is it's all being gained for the low low cost of 1200 dead and wounded a day. Russia runs out of manpower long before the Ukrainians do, and decades before the Ukrainians run out of land, at that rate. "Advancing is advancing" is a stupid thing say in that context, especially as former army, when you actually know better. If the Russian arty is doing its job, it wouldn't be suffering 10x the casualties despite firing 10x more shells than the Ukrainians, and they'd actually be advancing (more than a few feet per day). "but but but 80% of the Ukrainian casualties are caused by Russian artillery" is not a counterpoint. All that means is that Russians suck worse at everything else. Yes, that's the one thing that we agree on. Economically, NATO and the West can trickle tiny, barely noticeable fractions of their budgets towards Ukraine, and evidently that's enough to foil Russians, who are pouring ~30% of their GDP into it. Step up support just a little bit, and the Russians can't keep up. They'll go bankrupt, and you and I will never notice the money sent to Ukraine. THOSE are the economies of scale we're looking at here. Russia is a dirt poor shithole full of servile mud people. The only thing Russia has going for it is that it has more lives to throw away, and Sad Vlad's desperate propaganda efforts to make the situation seem hopeless to simple minds in the West (with you obliging him).

You responded to my posts, not my points. Responding to my points requires you to actually acknowledge and address the specific things I'm saying, rather than full-quoting me and just repeating what you've already said. Your beliefs have no bearing on the debate, but do seem to taint your reasoning. The sources you've provided aren't necessarily false. It's the conclusions that you draw from them that's the problem.

I'll have to take your word on that. Nobody knows skience better than you. 🙄

You know what the definition of unfalsifiable means, but the logical implications are beyond you. That tracks. You're one of the only people on this forum that demands cites for negative claims. 🤣 First, plants consume CO2. I'll assume you know that. Second, CO2 in the atmosphere is measured in PPM. You'll have to show us your "sources".

FFS, man. I've responded to this (lousy) point at least a half dozen times, and just you plough past and ignore that on your way to saying it again. Do you figure you're just going to bludgeon us into submission via repetition? If you're not going to do me the courtesy of responding to what I write, there's no reason to read the rest of your post.

It doesn't matter that 80% of the casualties Russia is causing is with their artillery. This has been address multiple times, and you just sort of blow past it and keep repeating yourself. Let's try an analogy: If your football team averages 3 points a game, and 80% of that is field goals (most of which are taken from 50+ yards and miss), are you concluding that your special teams are effective/unstoppable? No. You conclude that you have a dogshit offense, and the only points you're putting on the board are field goals. I showed you two timestamped maps from Dec 2023, and June 2024. You just ignored it went on repeating yourself. 10-20km of advances, over several months, (now more or less stalled) and costing the Russia and their meat assaults ~1200 daily dead and wounded - that's what the BBC and ABC are reporting. At that rate, Russia will complete their conquest of the Donbas in...what? 2040? It'll only cost them 7,000,000 dead.

LOL! They're wearing leather. That girl is scarred for life! She'll be turning tricks in no time. 🙄

but they don't, and the fact that you're still arguing they do means you haven't, in fact, conceded anything. They try to make up for it, but their numerical advantages aren't translating to battlefield effect. Ukraine is doing far more damage with far less ammunition, and that's a fact, rather than a "math loop", lol. Are they supposed to be taking stupid, useless risks, yielding negligible near-zero results? What doctrine is that from? A nothingburger of a statement. You've been shown the maps multiple times. You can see Russia's "advances" over the last 2 years amount to a wet dogfart. "But but ABC is saying...." doesn't somehow change that.

Some things are inherently wrong, like murder, rape and stealing. Some things are a matter of perspective, like premarital sex, abortion, divorce, gay marriage etc. When someone dresses up as a dog and let's a kid pet them, I imagine they're having their heads pat or something like that - silly, harmless fun. You, on the other hand, make it sound like they're angling for a reach-around. Perspective.

It's math. If they're firing 1/5th or fewer rounds (as your numbers would suggest) and if Russians are suffering 2:1 casualties (as most sources report) then that's 1/10th as effective. SO WHAT? This has nothing to do with the question we're debating, and it's the same on both sides. All it tells us is that the Russian airforce, navy and infantry are even shittier than their artillery. If it takes 10 Russian shells to match the effectiveness of a single Ukrainian one, the numerical advantage you keep talking about is what's actually moot. Irrelevant fact. If their "advancing" amounts to pushing from one blade of grass to the next, at massive cost in human life and materials, what does that count for?

Don't be. He's been on this forum for something like 20 years and I have zero doubt he was in the army. We talked about Afghanistan back in Harper's day. He's really not one of the bad ones here, even if I think his biases blind him.

The math shows it's 10th as effective. Reconsider what you're trying to say here: Russia is firing 5x as many artillery shells as Ukraine, but the fact that it's 1/10th as effective is somehow a moot point? Wtf...? That's utter nonsense, and there's no point in responding to the rest of your post, or even continuing the debate if this is the logic you're running with.

I said the Elections Act didn't exist!?! 🤣 Oooookay. Everyone knows CdnFox knows, the best and most convincing lies are the ones that are too shockingly stupid for anyone to possibly believe. Take a clown-bow. You really outdid yourself here.

Who did you think you were fooling with this link? Your make-believe doesn't magically become reality because you linked the landing page for a government website. 🤣🤣 Are you trying to prove you're the dumbest person on the forum? You're making a strong case for it.

No, because 80% of Russia's casualties are caused by Ukrainian artillery, and Ukraine is firing less than 20% the amount of shells, but causing double the casualties. What does that math tell you? I've already brought this up, but you just sort of talk past me and repeat the same points in different ways... Not for the Russians. They lost them in droves last summer as they're apparently easy to locate, they have minimal capability to replace the systems because of sanctions, and they continue to lose them regularly. Not disagreeing, but how do you figure that situation is going to improve? Does arguing unwittingly on Putin's behalf about how hopeless the Ukrainian situation is, despite all evidence to the contrary, somehow help? I really don't get what you're trying to do here, and how you're failing to see that the most important battle for Putin is winning the hearts and minds of people like you by repeating the same points over and over until it's taken for granted. This is all bad logic - all of it. Ukraine is "begging" for equipment because they're not getting what they're asking for, and what they need. They're lack of gains on the ground are matched by Russia's, who despite the overwhelming and hopeless advantage they apparently have, still aren't moving.

No, what I know is that you did not quote the elections act, and that you're openly, obviously lying about that. 🤡 Because it wasn't a typo, you sad little clown. Terms are 5 years, according to your fantasy legal definition, "which is why the last election was 2020" and the next one is 2025. 🤣🤣🤣

He's always been a loser and a joke. He knows it. That's why he these arguments are all mortal conflicts for him. His ego can't handle any challenge. This forum is all he has. 🤡🤡🤡

You typed it on purpose: The frankly shocking stupidity behind this is not that you typed 2020 instead of 2021, it's that intended to do just that, insisting that a PM "term" is 5 years by your completely made up and unbelievably dumb "legal definition". It's your foolishness on perfect display. We can skip the multi-page song and dance where you bullshit and clown around about all of the reasons you can't or won't source this "legal definition". This one is so painfully and obviously wrong on its face that it doesn't even matter. 🤣 That you don't have the emotional maturity to admit you were wrong is a given. The real question now is what your inevitable meltdown is going to look like. Which previous butthurt are you going to try to dredge up? How many emojis and caps will you ROFLMAO pound out on your keyboard in your upcoming performance?

After just telling us that the last election was in 2020, I understand why you'd have to say SOMETHING!!!! 🤡🤡🤡

Sorry but that's not what you said. You said 75% of it was landing on Ukrainian troops, which obviously isn't true. Whether it's "on target" or not is probably a matter of perspective, given that Russia seems to be spraying and praying more than anything. "On target" for them probably means anything within a couple of miles. 🤣 Artillery may be king, but there's obviously a lot more to it than number of shells fired, else Russia wouldn't constantly be losing artillery duels, whining about their lack of artillery radar systems, and suffering 2:1 casualty ratios, correct? NATO doesn't need a war economy to outproduce Russia and North Korea. The US's peacetime military budget alone is bigger than Russia and North Korea's wartime economies combined. There is literally no contest there. A wartime economy is also something that's hard to sustain, and requires massive deficit and reserve spending. Russia and North Korea may be outproducing artillery shells, but this is obviously not a war-ending advantage. Producing 20,000 shells for an artillery unit doesn't count for much if your artillery radar gets knocked out by HIMARs, your shells trajectories are being tracked by enemy radar, and you take accurate return fire from out of your range, does it? You haven't though. You've shown that their making more artillery shells.

I think it would have been better if Joe showed up with some energy and with a functioning brain. The only way this gets turned into lemonade is if they very quickly find a replacement.

Yeah I don't see how anyone can view this as anything but an absolute disaster for the democrats. I turned it off after Biden's opening statement. What Trump did during the debate never really mattered. Everyone knew he was just going to rant through his regular slogans and lying BS. What everyone wanted to see was whether Biden still functioned, but he did his best impression of a vegetable.

Another useless wall of text, saying nothing. This is what you do when you've humiliated yourself - you just try to spam through and try to move the thread to the next page. 🤣