War In Ukraine

[athos]

3 hours ago, Aristides said:

Russia invaded Ukraine.

 

Before that, NATO (USA) intended to attack Russia, among other things, with biological weapons.

 

[Aristides]

6 minutes ago, athos said:

 

Before that, NATO (USA) intended to attack Russia, among other things, with biological weapons.

 

More Kremlin generated bullshit. Enjoy Finland as your new NATO neighbour. Per capita, probably the best armed country in Europe.

Edited April 12, 2023 by Aristides

[athos]

19 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

You learnt about reverse physiology now, too, communist? I don't work for soup in Siberia, that is for sure. ???

Anyhow, here is you again: 

and 1 more for the Wagner boss: 

Yes but, after the promotion to senior deep state bot, your Anglo-Khazarian masters let you work for a portion of porridge with a bit of Canadian maple syrup.

?

[athos]

14 minutes ago, Aristides said:

More Kremlin generated bullshit. Enjoy Finland as your new NATO neighbour. Per capita, probably the best armed country in Europe.

 

Anglo-Khazarian evil will be defeated.
Russia will squash Anglo-Khazarian reptiles and their puppets one by one.

 

 

?

[athos]

10 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

I don't think you tried Maple Syrup hence why you make fun of it. As a matter of fact, I know you did not tried it. 

You lied to these folks for so long you were from Vancouver, then when I caught you posting nonsense against the West in Australia, you changed both locations to Hong Kong. 

Present the data, work or face the digital sword, daily. ?

 

Comrade come to Hong Kong, you will get more food from the Chinese government than from your penny-pinching Anglo-Khazarian masters.

?

 

[Nationalist]

15 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Wooo - easy there muffin, sounds like you need your afternoon cookie and a nap You're getting all worked up!

 

Well the allies could take over boht in about 8 days if that was their goal of course. Russia has shown they are weak, and now they're weak and low on ammo.

But of course the allies won't. What do we care who owns the donbas or crimea really. We care that russia's military crumbles which it is, and that their economy suffers and leaves them vunerable, which it is, and that the russian leadership learns what a horrible mistake it is to go against countries that are backed by the west, which they have,

Putin already lost. He lost when this war wasn't over in a week like he thought it would be. Now it's just a matter of how badly he loses and if he can mitigate his losses. It doesn't look great for him.

I'm sorry but this just sounds like goal post moving to me. Donbas is now Russian territory. Bakhmud (sp?) Is about to fall in a bloody heap. 

Sure, Russian military supplies may have been spent but, looking at the results, it looks like mission accomplished. 

Unless you think NATO will go after Russia now?

[CdnFox]

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I'm sorry but this just sounds like goal post moving to me. Donbas is now Russian territory. Bakhmud (sp?) Is about to fall in a bloody heap. 

Sure. But two things come to mind in that respect. Well - three things really.

1 - Donbas was pretty much russian territory since day one of the war. That's not really anything new.

2 - There was a LOT of ukraine that was in russian hands 12 months ago ... that isn't now. The russians advanced and advanced and advanced... till suddenly they lost a craptonne of what they gained in a bloody and devistating defeat.

3 - Russia just had it's 'big offenseive' That was their big move. They gained a small amount of ground, literally km's, worth rather than tens of kms, and are bogged down.  Ukraines offensive hasn't started yet.

The germans were winning in russia right up until they were losing.

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Sure, Russian military supplies may have been spent but, looking at the results, it looks like mission accomplished. 

Well lets take a look. THeir goal was to control Ukraine. Thats what their attack focused on in the early days and what their goal was. They are not going to take ukraine. They MIGHT hold on to a section of the donbas. I doubt much more. That's not a particularly productive area, they wanted to food producing capability. It's valuable and very strategic.

So they might add donbas to the gamebag.  What did they pay?

Their military might has been crippled. Their supply of tanks and other critical vehicles is shot, and will take many years at current production to replace. And that will put a major strain on an already strained economy.

Their population has taken a hit. YOu can't just lose 100 thousand young men like that and not have it felt in your country. not to mention all the shell shocked men who'll be returning home with little support. Vietnam had far fewer casualties and took a huge toll on america.

Their economy has taken a hit. And they're starting to feel it. That's not only going to make it harder to replace that military hardware they just blew up, it's going to lead to civil dissatisfaction and other problems that will keep them out of the international sphere for some time.  And everybody everywhere is looking at how NOT to buy Russian oil, except the chinese who will then own them as suka.

They have lost MASSIVE international prestige as a 'superpower', who will want their protection or to buy their defective armaments now?

THey have a new nato country right on their border.

And ukraine will now wind up hating russia forever and the west will basically own them as an advanced tactical base which they'll load up with the best military gear and russia will now have a genuine threat on their border.

 

Soooo - explain to me how russia is doing well here?

3 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Unless you think NATO will go after Russia now?

There will be no need.  Russia will be nicely crippled and won't be a major player in world affairs for quite some time, if ever.

They will spend their money slowly replacing military gear that didnt' work well in the first place in actual battle, while the allies will be replacing the missiles and such with the latest generation of new smart weapons improved based on the actual war experiences and tactics they learned from, so their gear (which was already lethal to the russians) will get better while russia can't keep up.

Nato already kneecapped russia, and it hardly cost anything. And it isn't even over yet - every day russia spends more money and loses more gear and more people. Perfect They won't need to go after them when it's done.

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Sure. But two things come to mind in that respect. Well - three things really.

1 - Donbas was pretty much russian territory since day one of the war. That's not really anything new.

2 - There was a LOT of ukraine that was in russian hands 12 months ago ... that isn't now. The russians advanced and advanced and advanced... till suddenly they lost a craptonne of what they gained in a bloody and devistating defeat.

3 - Russia just had it's 'big offenseive' That was their big move. They gained a small amount of ground, literally km's, worth rather than tens of kms, and are bogged down.  Ukraines offensive hasn't started yet.

The germans were winning in russia right up until they were losing.

Well lets take a look. THeir goal was to control Ukraine. Thats what their attack focused on in the early days and what their goal was. They are not going to take ukraine. They MIGHT hold on to a section of the donbas. I doubt much more. That's not a particularly productive area, they wanted to food producing capability. It's valuable and very strategic.

So they might add donbas to the gamebag.  What did they pay?

Their military might has been crippled. Their supply of tanks and other critical vehicles is shot, and will take many years at current production to replace. And that will put a major strain on an already strained economy.

Their population has taken a hit. YOu can't just lose 100 thousand young men like that and not have it felt in your country. not to mention all the shell shocked men who'll be returning home with little support. Vietnam had far fewer casualties and took a huge toll on america.

Their economy has taken a hit. And they're starting to feel it. That's not only going to make it harder to replace that military hardware they just blew up, it's going to lead to civil dissatisfaction and other problems that will keep them out of the international sphere for some time.  And everybody everywhere is looking at how NOT to buy Russian oil, except the chinese who will then own them as suka.

They have lost MASSIVE international prestige as a 'superpower', who will want their protection or to buy their defective armaments now?

THey have a new nato country right on their border.

And ukraine will now wind up hating russia forever and the west will basically own them as an advanced tactical base which they'll load up with the best military gear and russia will now have a genuine threat on their border.

 

Soooo - explain to me how russia is doing well here?

There will be no need.  Russia will be nicely crippled and won't be a major player in world affairs for quite some time, if ever.

They will spend their money slowly replacing military gear that didnt' work well in the first place in actual battle, while the allies will be replacing the missiles and such with the latest generation of new smart weapons improved based on the actual war experiences and tactics they learned from, so their gear (which was already lethal to the russians) will get better while russia can't keep up.

Nato already kneecapped russia, and it hardly cost anything. And it isn't even over yet - every day russia spends more money and loses more gear and more people. Perfect They won't need to go after them when it's done.

Ya I "semi-agree" with a lot of this. I'm not really convinced Russia's initial goal was to take all of Ukraine, but I doubt any of us will ever know the truth of that. And I don't see Russia having issues with supplies. Quite the contrary, we see Ukraine having issues with supplies...and soldiers.

One thing I see that we consistently ignore is the Polish desires after the fact. Most of western Ukraine was, not so long ago, a Polish "protectorate". Poland controlled it. When the dust settles and Ukraine is left crippled, will Poland demand their "protectorate" back?

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ya I "semi-agree" with a lot of this. I'm not really convinced Russia's initial goal was to take all of Ukraine, but I doubt any of us will ever know the truth of that. And I don't see Russia having issues with supplies. Quite the contrary, we see Ukraine having issues with supplies...and soldiers.

Their initial attack left little doubt as to their goal i think. Go back and look at the original pushes - it had nothing to do with donbas, that's for sure. There is no doubt they were trying to take the whole country- i suppose one might argue that once they had it and had gotten agreements for donbas they would leave the other parts but - if that was the case why haven't they negotiated for that for peace? They've suggested otherwies.

Supplies are always short for both sides but while ukraine is getting new tanks and new missiles and more ammo, russia isn't getting much of anything. A few artillery shells from north korea.

The reports are very clear that russia is critically short of several things including artillery ammo and precision weapons. And their combat style really depends on those.

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

One thing I see that we consistently ignore is the Polish desires after the fact. Most of western Ukraine was, not so long ago, a Polish "protectorate". Poland controlled it. When the dust settles and Ukraine is left crippled, will Poland demand their "protectorate" back?

I think the us will get first claim, but i'm sure poland will want to strengthen ties. They have contributed and anyone who does is going to have a lot of political capital after a war.

[Nationalist]

36 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Their initial attack left little doubt as to their goal i think. Go back and look at the original pushes - it had nothing to do with donbas, that's for sure. There is no doubt they were trying to take the whole country- i suppose one might argue that once they had it and had gotten agreements for donbas they would leave the other parts but - if that was the case why haven't they negotiated for that for peace? They've suggested otherwies.

Supplies are always short for both sides but while ukraine is getting new tanks and new missiles and more ammo, russia isn't getting much of anything. A few artillery shells from north korea.

The reports are very clear that russia is critically short of several things including artillery ammo and precision weapons. And their combat style really depends on those.

Ya I was confused by that attack on Kiev. What was the point? To cut the head of the opposition off? Russia could have simply levelled Kiev and been done with it. Why didn't they? Was it restraint for some reason? I don't know.

I think this is the time to negotiate peace. The people of Europe do not want a full on war on their land again and the costs are getting silly. And I don't believe "the reports" anymore.

40 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I think the us will get first claim, but i'm sure poland will want to strengthen ties. They have contributed and anyone who does is going to have a lot of political capital after a war.

This could re-open a festering wound and create more conflict.

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Ya I was confused by that attack on Kiev. What was the point? To cut the head of the opposition off? Russia could have simply levelled Kiev and been done with it. Why didn't they? Was it restraint for some reason? I don't know.

As a rule he who holds the capital holds the country.  It's a symbol, the seat of power, the nexus of communication, etc etc

If you want to control a country control the capital.

5 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I think this is the time to negotiate peace.

I think you and the chinese are probably the only ones advocating that right now

Ukraine wont want peace especially before their next offensive.

Russia won't admit it lost so won't be negotiating anything immediately.

The allies are happy with russia getting drained and sucked dry so they're not going to push for it.

I think we're a little ways off.

7 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

This could re-open a festering wound and create more conflict.

Possibly but unlikely. THe poles won't do anyting to cross the US, and russia by that point will be too far gone to worry about it in the short term.

[Nationalist]

52 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

As a rule he who holds the capital holds the country.  It's a symbol, the seat of power, the nexus of communication, etc etc

If you want to control a country control the capital.

I think you and the chinese are probably the only ones advocating that right now

Ukraine wont want peace especially before their next offensive.

Russia won't admit it lost so won't be negotiating anything immediately.

The allies are happy with russia getting drained and sucked dry so they're not going to push for it.

I think we're a little ways off.

Possibly but unlikely. THe poles won't do anyting to cross the US, and russia by that point will be too far gone to worry about it in the short term.

I know these are the MSM talking points, but I have lost all trust in the MSM.

As the envelope Russia has The Ukrainian forces in, in Bakhmud, closes, much of the Ukrainian forces will be either dead or captured. It appears that is going to happen.

Q: Putting aside the whole "Russia Bad" thing...is it possible that Russia simply wants that Russian region in the east to be under their flag?

[Aristides]

Kharkiv as well. He went after Ukraine's two largest cities right off the bat. Putin wants the whole place, one chunk at a time.

[CdnFox]

58 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I know these are the MSM talking points, but I have lost all trust in the MSM.

As the envelope Russia has The Ukrainian forces in, in Bakhmud, closes, much of the Ukrainian forces will be either dead or captured. It appears that is going to happen.

Well there's a fair number of independent orgs doing research on it - you can always check them out.

I don't think there's any doubt that the russians will take bakhmud but - what have they paid for it? In the last 3 months they've only advanced about a km and the losses have been bloody.

We get less about what ukraine has paid, but indications are they've experienced a reasonably favorable loss ratio.

Bakhmud is going to be a phyrric victory - the kind were you say 'a few more victories like that and we'll have lost this war'.

We'll see. The ukraine offensive is just about due in the next few months or so and we'll see how that goes.

58 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Q: Putting aside the whole "Russia Bad" thing...is it possible that Russia simply wants that Russian region in the east to be under their flag?

well i think russia wanted that but wanted the whole ukraine back in the fold. And there is (or was) a certain level of russian sympathy everywhere in the ukraine. It was russian territory for a long time, there has been endless problems with corruption and scandal with the various gov'ts, some people like the idea of being part of russia.

So i think putin thought that he could make a quick stab and gain control of the country and shoot the leaders, and then people would kind of say "meh - well, it is what it is" and he'd control the entire region including the pro russian ones.

And that probably would have been true if he'd won. And it was close.

I don't think he'd have JUST been interested in the donbas because he would have been in the same pickle he is now -  ukraine would resist it and the allies could pour in resources.  I think he just wanted to take the whole thing in a week and then nobody could have said anything.

[Nationalist]

34 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Well there's a fair number of independent orgs doing research on it - you can always check them out.

I don't think there's any doubt that the russians will take bakhmud but - what have they paid for it? In the last 3 months they've only advanced about a km and the losses have been bloody.

We get less about what ukraine has paid, but indications are they've experienced a reasonably favorable loss ratio.

Bakhmud is going to be a phyrric victory - the kind were you say 'a few more victories like that and we'll have lost this war'.

We'll see. The ukraine offensive is just about due in the next few months or so and we'll see how that goes.

well i think russia wanted that but wanted the whole ukraine back in the fold. And there is (or was) a certain level of russian sympathy everywhere in the ukraine. It was russian territory for a long time, there has been endless problems with corruption and scandal with the various gov'ts, some people like the idea of being part of russia.

So i think putin thought that he could make a quick stab and gain control of the country and shoot the leaders, and then people would kind of say "meh - well, it is what it is" and he'd control the entire region including the pro russian ones.

And that probably would have been true if he'd won. And it was close.

I don't think he'd have JUST been interested in the donbas because he would have been in the same pickle he is now -  ukraine would resist it and the allies could pour in resources.  I think he just wanted to take the whole thing in a week and then nobody could have said anything.

Meh...possible too.

I still don't like the NATO involvement. Its too risky. Too expensive. Not enough return.

[Aristides]

Helping Putin neuter himself without NATO having to be directly involved. That's a great return.

[taxme]

21 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Well not exactly. Remember you don't make money by giving things away for free.   So that's not REALLY the main motivation.

They want to see russia weak and the ukrainains are prepared to make that happen, and they want to test their equipment and get rid of old inventory and the ukranians are willing to put it to good use.  But they also are betting on the fact that the russians won't be able to take over the whole country. They'll eventually leave with little or nothing. And at that point the allies will have MASSIVE political influence in the area and will be first in line to requip the military, rebuild the infrastructure, etc etc.  And even if they don't allow them to join nato, it'll be like they have a nato base on the border.

But in any case it's a win win win win for the US.

Zelensky didn't drive any tanks across the border   This is 100 percent putin.

How many times did you have to practice that in front of the mirror before you could say it with a straight face ? I personally lol'd and i'm just reading it

Putin is an evil scumbag who wants to expand his empire by military force and FORTUNATELY he absolutely sucks at it and is getting schooled by the ukraine of all people.

I suspect he'll be gone soon.  But in any case Russia has learned that i'ts not a good idea to go invading the neighbours for fun and profit. THAT is what leads to peace.

With all of your silly azz replies, they have shown to me that you are like another one of those puppets on a string for corrupt Nazi Zelensky. You have no idea as to how much profit Zelensky and his Nazi ilk have made from this war. You are just not bright enough to know anything about the war. You just enjoy parroting what the lying and fake MSM tells you every day. You have nothing to tell me that will ever convince me that Putin is the only bad guy here. There is always two sides to every story. You need to try and get the other side of the story for a change. 

The Russian speaking Ukranian's asked for Putin's help in assisting them in trying to get Nazi Zelensky off their backs. The Nazi has been treating those Russian speaking people like shit. They have had enough of the arse hole. That is a fact so live with it, lefty. 

The evil scumbag here is your Nazi hero Zelensky. Putin is not on an expansion drive. Putin has no intentions of trying to invade other countries in the future. Only America, China, and NATO are the ones that are always trying to expand their empires. Wake up, lefty. ?

[taxme]

6 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Sure. But two things come to mind in that respect. Well - three things really.

1 - Donbas was pretty much russian territory since day one of the war. That's not really anything new.

2 - There was a LOT of ukraine that was in russian hands 12 months ago ... that isn't now. The russians advanced and advanced and advanced... till suddenly they lost a craptonne of what they gained in a bloody and devistating defeat.

3 - Russia just had it's 'big offenseive' That was their big move. They gained a small amount of ground, literally km's, worth rather than tens of kms, and are bogged down.  Ukraines offensive hasn't started yet.

The germans were winning in russia right up until they were losing.

Well lets take a look. THeir goal was to control Ukraine. Thats what their attack focused on in the early days and what their goal was. They are not going to take ukraine. They MIGHT hold on to a section of the donbas. I doubt much more. That's not a particularly productive area, they wanted to food producing capability. It's valuable and very strategic.

So they might add donbas to the gamebag.  What did they pay?

Their military might has been crippled. Their supply of tanks and other critical vehicles is shot, and will take many years at current production to replace. And that will put a major strain on an already strained economy.

Their population has taken a hit. YOu can't just lose 100 thousand young men like that and not have it felt in your country. not to mention all the shell shocked men who'll be returning home with little support. Vietnam had far fewer casualties and took a huge toll on america.

Their economy has taken a hit. And they're starting to feel it. That's not only going to make it harder to replace that military hardware they just blew up, it's going to lead to civil dissatisfaction and other problems that will keep them out of the international sphere for some time.  And everybody everywhere is looking at how NOT to buy Russian oil, except the chinese who will then own them as suka.

They have lost MASSIVE international prestige as a 'superpower', who will want their protection or to buy their defective armaments now?

THey have a new nato country right on their border.

And ukraine will now wind up hating russia forever and the west will basically own them as an advanced tactical base which they'll load up with the best military gear and russia will now have a genuine threat on their border.

 

Soooo - explain to me how russia is doing well here?

There will be no need.  Russia will be nicely crippled and won't be a major player in world affairs for quite some time, if ever.

They will spend their money slowly replacing military gear that didnt' work well in the first place in actual battle, while the allies will be replacing the missiles and such with the latest generation of new smart weapons improved based on the actual war experiences and tactics they learned from, so their gear (which was already lethal to the russians) will get better while russia can't keep up.

Nato already kneecapped russia, and it hardly cost anything. And it isn't even over yet - every day russia spends more money and loses more gear and more people. Perfect They won't need to go after them when it's done.

Now, I am pretty sure that you are a PR spokes thinghy for Zelensky and his Nazi regime ilk. 

Putin can build as much military equipment that is needed to keep this feud going. What? Do you think that once Russia runs out of ammunition and military equipment they will not able to make more for themselves? Only dimwitted liberals  will believe that nonsense. Sadly, there are plenty of those liberal bimbos around. Way too many for my liking. ?

 

[CdnFox]

10 minutes ago, taxme said:

With all of your silly azz replies, they have shown to me that you are like another one of those puppets on a string for corrupt Nazi blah blah blah rant rant rant hysterics hysterics

Holy crap guys...  i think i broke him!

Edited April 12, 2023 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

20 minutes ago, taxme said:

Now, I am pretty sure that you are a PR spokes thinghy for Zelensky and his Nazi regime ilk. 

Well you're mentally deficient then.

20 minutes ago, taxme said:

Putin can build as much military equipment that is needed to keep this feud going.

No, he can't. Currently the destruction is outpacing production by a huge amount.

20 minutes ago, taxme said:

What?

I said NO HE CAN"T! Jeez dude you can just go back and read it again if you couldn't hear the first time, it's the internet.

20 minutes ago, taxme said:

Do you think that once Russia runs out of ammunition and military equipment they will not able to make more for themselves?

Not nearly fast enough. LIke - not even remotely close. War consumes that stuff at an insane rate. Even the allies will have troubles but there's a LOT of them, they've got the full manufacturing power of several nations.

20 minutes ago, taxme said:

Only dimwitted liberals  will believe that nonsense. Sadly, there are plenty of those liberal bimbos around. Way too many for my liking. ?

Well - them and people who can count When you look at what they expend and what they can produce, pretty quickly there's a problem. Which is why the Wagners were screaming about not getting enough ammo.

So that really limits what they can do.  And for more sophisticated devices like tanks - forget it. They produce them so slowly that if the war stopped now it would take many many years to replace just what they've lost. If fact it's hard to even get the computer chips and such for them. If the chinese weren't selling them to them on the side they'd be totally screwed.

And then there's the money. And that's not infinite either.

IF the war stopped right this second, it would be years before russia could rebuild it's military losses. They really can't keep up at the moment.

 

[athos]

 

Ukri general: "No point in holding Bahmut"

 

 

[athos]

 

US Bahmut "volunteer" Edward Walter Wilton returns home

 

 

Edited April 13, 2023 by athos

[Moonbox]

11 hours ago, athos said:

 

US Bahmut "volunteer" Edward Walter Wilton returns home

 

 

Russian prison conscripts war volunteers return home:

[taxme]

On 4/11/2023 at 5:23 PM, Aristides said:

He has invaded the place twice since 2014 you twit.

 

FFS, can't you read? Can't you even watch a video on Finlands history that has been posted twice.

 

Winter War

You are the real liberal twit here. I cannot find anything on the internet where it says that Russia invaded Finland in 2014. Show me where I can find this information, lefty? 

Putin has no intentions of invading Finland. That is all made up bull chit by the ilk that gets people believing in that lie and nonsense. It's easy to say that you appear to be a gullible fool that will believe the lies of the left wing MSM. There may have been some attempts to invade Finland by the old Stalinist communist regime in the past, but not today.

Get a life, will you, a wanna be Aristotle. ?

[taxme]

23 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Holy crap guys...  i think i broke him!

Holy crap, mac. You broke me?? Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. You could not even crack an egg open, your so stunned. LOL.