DUI_Offender Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 (edited) 12 hours ago, Army Guy said: You think Putin, is of sound mind... Putin is not going to be using nuclear weapons. Essentially, you are stating that we should not antagonise Russia since they are somewhat likely to use nuclear weapons. However, NATO is not likely at all to use nuclear weapons, since it would mean the end of humanity. Know how ridiculous that sounds? It's nearly certain nobody will use nuclear weapons. However, in the odd chance Russia did deploy nuclear weapons, NATO and the United States would be very quick to retaliate. I also find it unbelievable that you compare Putin to Biden. Are you getting your political narratives from far-right news media, and Russian TV? We can.be a nation of JFKs during the Cuban missile crisis, and stand up for what is right, or we can be a nation of appeasers, like Neville Chamberlain, giving into bullies and tyrants. I chose to stand up for what is right. Edited July 3 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted July 3 Author Report Share Posted July 3 4 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: Putin is not going to be using nuclear weapons. It would lead to the destruction of Russia. There would need to be a devastatingly final retaliation from the US, or risk seeing other states employ the weapon. Reality is the weapon is deterrent in purpose, only. Push Russia to giving them no choice however, and they would likely opt to destroy the world than to lose face in the face of it.people Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 (edited) 9 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Push Russia to giving them no choice however, and they would likely opt to destroy the world than to lose face in the face of it.people You're delusional. Edited July 4 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted July 3 Author Report Share Posted July 3 9 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said: You're delusional. Thats what they said to those who felt Trump would win in 2016. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 11 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said: You're delusional. No...he's not actually. What do you know about Russia and Russians? Jack-sh1t that's what. The Russians have finally recovered from the chaos of the breakup of the Soviet Union. They support Putin now absolutely, as evidenced by his last election. Now you insane fcks want to tear it down again. They can and if pushed...they will use nukes.! Is Ukraine really worth that? Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 28 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: Thats what they said to those who felt Trump would win in 2016. You are changing the subject. There was a time when most North Americans believed that WW3 and nuclear war was imminent, especially during the Red scare in the 1950s. That pretty much ended after the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Yet here we are. A bunch of yellow- bellied Putin appeasers trying to convince the forum to give Putin what he wants, or else "he will deploy nuclear warheads at his adversaries, and humanity will end." lol...I think you are stuck in a time warp. Put away your Elvis records, and come join us in the 21st century. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Nationalist said: No...he's not actually. What do you know about Russia and Russians? Jack-sh1t that's what. The Russians have finally recovered from the chaos of the breakup of the Soviet Union. They support Putin now absolutely, as evidenced by his last election. Now you insane fcks want to tear it down again. They can and if pushed...they will use nukes.! Is Ukraine really worth that? 1. Those "elections" were rigged. Putins opponents are in jail or dead. 2. Russia is arguably at its weakest state in the last 100 years. Only the Russia of the 90s come close in the level of corruption and ineptitude. You are typical of White Supremacists. You think you are smarter than the room, but you know absolutely nothing aside from the most elementary facts. Edited July 3 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nationalist Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 (edited) 22 minutes ago, DUI_Offender said: 1. Those "elections" were rigged. Putins opponents are in jail or dead. 2. Russia is arguably at its weakest state in the last 100 years. Only the Russia of the 90s come close in the level of corruption and ineptitude. You are typical of White Supremacists. You think you are smarter than the room, but you know absolutely nothing aside from the most elementary facts. Google Russian Economy... Quote Far from being crippled, Russia's economy is growing. The International Monetary Fund predicts that Russia will record economic growth of 3.2% this year. Caveats aside, that's still more than in any of the world's advanced economies. “Debilitating” sanctions have not produced shortages in the shops. Please try to not be so stoopid...Mkaaayyy...? Results from Russia’s Central Election Commission showed Putin got 87% of the vote. The Reuters news agency reported communist candidate Nikolai Kharitonov coming in second with just under 4% of the vote, newcomer Vladislav Davankov third, and ultra-nationalist Leonid Slutsky fourth. Nikolai Kharitonov - Alive and well. Vladislav Davankov - Alive and well. Leonid Slutsky - Alive and well. You need to stop drinking so much... Oh and...you wanna call me a "White Supremacist"? OK Limp-boy...you do that. But always remember... 1. You can either prove your accusation or go fck yourself. 2. You have a bad habit of being dead wrong about everything. Edited July 3 by Nationalist Quote Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 6 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: Putin is not going to be using nuclear weapons. Essentially, you are stating that we should not antagonise Russia since they are somewhat likely to use nuclear weapons. However, NATO is not likely at all to use nuclear weapons, since it would mean the end of humanity. Know how ridiculous that sounds? It's nearly certain nobody will use nuclear weapons. However, in the odd chance Russia did deploy nuclear weapons, NATO and the United States would be very quick to retaliate. I also find it unbelievable that you compare Putin to Biden. Are you getting your political narratives from far-right news media, and Russian TV? We can.be a nation of JFKs during the Cuban missile crisis, and stand up for what is right, or we can be a nation of appeasers, like Neville Chamberlain, giving into bullies and tyrants. I chose to stand up for what is right. I'm glad your crystal ball is working, many NATO analysts are not so sure as you are...Russian Military is confident it can survive a nuclear exchange...Again watch some of the Russia media and tell me they have a sound mind... I've asked you this question already, so if they are not afraid of Antagonising Russia why have they not committed to fully supporting Ukraine, why have they not sent troops into Ukraine, or better equipment ...you must know the answer you continue to use the same excuse NATO is not afraid of Russia....but something is holding them back what is it? Thats not what i said at all....Russia is more likely to provoke a nuclear strike, That's not me saying that Thats NATO doctrine...NATO takes all of Russia threats seriously...As Russia is a still a very dangerous opponent... Nothing is certain... Again i did not compare bidin with Putin...your twisting my words...i said would you trust biden with a nuclear trigger it's a yes or no question... Just how are we standing up for what is right ? by giving Ukraine just enough support to maintain a stalemate...is thats what is right in your mind...in my mind what would be right is providing Ukraine with enough support to throw Russia back into Russia thats what would be right instead of leading them on and prolonging this conflict... NATO is holding back for what reason ?, something you have failed to explain to all of us...so call Russian sympathizers Right now you stand with the organization that likes to talk and act on the side of caution...afraid or very concerned with how Russia will react....If NATO is not afraid or very concerned what is holding them back...Is ukraine not a priority for NATO? Why is NATO so concerned with rearming at this moment what is the threat? is it Russia, China who ? I've been very consistent in my posts here....I want NATO to step up it's support so Ukraine can break the stalemated and throw Russia back to Russia....And if NATO is not going to do that then allow Ukraine to sit down at the table with Russia.....Becasue Ukraine is not going to win at the current level of support from NATO....it will continue to lose men and women for no real gains.....not sure how that makes me on the wrong side of this issue... 1 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 11 hours ago, Moonbox said: 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? Your stuck in the math loop, I've already conceded to your point, russian Arty is not as effective as Ukrainian not sure what else i can say... They make up for that fact by firing more rounds.... Russian are suppose to be taking more casualties they are on the offensive, which means they are taking more risk....you normally attack a position when you outnumber the defenders about 4 to 1...Thats not been happening in all cases...Russians just keep throwing men at the problem hoping to gain some ground.... Thats not what it shows at all, this conflict is basically being fought by arty...much like WWI....with one side making slow but steady progress through costly assaults'... when the Russias don't care about your math.....when Russia can afford all of the losses it takes...have you seen them change up their tactics....so for them it is working, losses means nothing.....where Ukraine can not sustain these loses, they are now putting prisoners on the front line, as new recruits are getting harder to come by which is another red flag....Meaning that Russia will win a war of attrition...That's where the math comes in... Advances are still advances, it means more territory that Ukrainian forces will have to take back, and yes each blade of grass is measured in blood and manpower...something Ukraine cannot afford to begin to match Russia...what does it count for, well on Ukraine side it counts for everything, a complete generation being expended to fight for Russian aggression, on the Russia side Putin gets to save face by whatever reason he decides to come up with....losses mean nothing, as we have already seen, if it did this would have stopped long ago...Russia will win this if it goes on for to long...Ukraine can not win a war of attrition...unless NATO steps up more than it has. 1 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted July 3 Author Report Share Posted July 3 2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: You are changing the subject. Not really. Simply pointing to you feeling am delusional vs me being as such. 2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: give Putin what he wants He will ultimately get what he wants one way or another. You would have to completely crush his army for him to leave the country. Ukraine doesn't have the manpower nor the tools to accomplish this. The west doesn't have the balls. They seem to be okay with keeping this a stalemate. Safer. What it truly boils down to, is how much of it that he will be getting once the dust settles. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 8 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Your stuck in the math loop, I've already conceded to your point, russian Arty is not as effective as Ukrainian not sure what else i can say... They make up for that fact by firing more rounds.... 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. 37 minutes ago, Army Guy said: Russian are suppose to be taking more casualties they are on the offensive, which means they are taking more risk.... Are they supposed to be taking stupid, useless risks, yielding negligible near-zero results? What doctrine is that from? 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: Advances are still advances, it means more territory that Ukrainian forces will have to take back, and yes each blade of grass is measured in blood and manpower 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. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 (edited) 2 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Not really. You changed the subject, and began talking about Donald Trump winning the 2016 US election. You are in your own little World, once again. 2 hours ago, Perspektiv said: He will ultimately get what he wants one way or another. Funny. That is what appeasers have said throughout history about various dictators (Hitler, Putin, Stalin, Mussolini, etc.) in recent history. 2 hours ago, Perspektiv said: Ukraine doesn't have the manpower nor the tools to accomplish this. The west doesn't have the balls. The West has send hundreds of billions in military and humanitarian aid towards Ukraine. What more do you want them to do- invade through Poland and the Baltic countries? Edited July 3 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 3 Report Share Posted July 3 (edited) 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: I'm glad your crystal ball is working, many NATO analysts are not so sure as you are...Russian Military is confident it can survive a nuclear exchange...Again watch some of the Russia media and tell me they have a sound mind... The Russian leaders know full well that they would definitely not survive a nuclear war against the West. It's one thing to brag, knowing an event will never happen. I could brag that I could defeat Georges St.Pierre in a fight, but that does not necessarily make it true. 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: why have they not sent troops into Ukraine NATO has not sent troops into Ukraine officially, since it would lead to a World War, and catastrophic results for the World. NATO obviously would defeat Russia, but it would be at too great a cost. A better question would be "Why has Russia not declared war on the countries that continue to arm and aid Ukraine?" Because they can't win a war against NATO. I don't think you understand that being able to defeat a nation in war, does not mean it's wise to do so. China could defeat India in an all-out war, but aside from relatively minor border skirmishes, the two countries remain at an uneasy peace, since they are both aware of the negative consequences of a major war. 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: Russia is more likely to provoke a nuclear strike, That's not me saying that Thats NATO doctrine...NATO takes all of Russia threats seriously...As Russia is a still a very dangerous opponent... Nothing is certain... Russia and Putin have made many threats, some pertaining to escalation and not ruling out nuclear weapons. The intelligence community is well aware that Russia is bluffing, and continue to disregard threats of escalation going on over two years. Putin can threaten NATO with nuclear weapons until he is blue in the face. He will never use nuclear weapons against any NATO country, so why even discuss it? 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: Again i did not compare bidin with Putin...your twisting my words...i said would you trust biden with a nuclear trigger it's a yes or no question... Of course. Having said that, do you trust Trump even having access to the nuclear code, or any top military secrets, after his term in office? 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: Just how are we standing up for what is right ? Giving humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine is the right thing to do, considering Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, a nation much smaller, and with a history of being persecuted by Russia to the point of genocide (Holodomor). This is just common sense. Even in prison, if a small guy fights a bully enough times, other inmates will get sick of it, and offer the smaller man shanks, and weapons eventually. Were you a guy who cheered on the neighbourhood bully while he victimised smaller children? 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: Right now you stand with the organization that likes to talk and act on the side of caution...afraid or very concerned with how Russia will react....If NATO is not afraid or very concerned what is holding them back...Is ukraine not a priority for NATO? You obviously have not read the NATO charter. NATO was created in response to Soviet aggression in the aftermath of World War 2, when the US, Canada, UK, and others got together, and pledged that they would go to war against Russia/USSR in one of the members were attacked. They key word being "MEMBERS." That is what the priority of NATO is. Why do you think Russia has never bothered to try and reclaim Lithuania, Latvia, or Estonia? They can't because NATO would invoke article 5, and immediately deploy troops to fight the Russian army- something that Russia is terrified of. 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: I've been very consistent in my posts here....I want NATO to step up it's support so Ukraine can break the stalemated and throw Russia back to Russia.... Strange...I can't recall you saying that. 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: And if NATO is not going to do that then allow Ukraine to sit down at the table with Russia.... LMAO....please tell me you are joking. Putin is as diplomatic as Hitler was. 7 hours ago, Army Guy said: .Becasue Ukraine is not going to win at the current level of support from NATO....it will continue to lose men and women for no real gains..... Russia is losing men at a ratio of nearly 2:1. Here's a titbit of information for you: People get killed in war. Edited July 4 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted July 4 Author Report Share Posted July 4 2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: You changed the subject I drew a parallel to point to your point being your opinion, and not fact. Changing the subject would be me asking you how many blowjobs did Stormy Daniel's give Trump and demanding an accurate response. I mean statistically accurate, down to the second. Thats changing the subject. Now, if I tell you your chances of being correct, are as high as Trump's chances of getting Melania wanting him to knock her up again, this would just be accurate statements being made. 2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: Funny. Am sure Zelensky is laughing, too. 2 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: The West has send hundreds of billions Its not the amount. It's the weapons they sent. The timing of it. They want Russia crushed, they would send enough aircraft and weapons to overwhelm them, and quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: Changing the subject would be me asking you how many blowjobs did Stormy Daniel's give Trump and demanding an accurate response. You are getting schooled in this thread in regards to the Ukraine-Russia War, so you begin talking about Trump winning the 2016 election, and how many blowjobs he received from a porn star. 19 minutes ago, Perspektiv said: Now, if I tell you your chances of being correct, are as high as Trump's chances of getting Melania wanting him to knock her up again, this would just be accurate statements being made. There you go again. Changing the subject to "everything about Donald trump." The thread title should be self-explanatory. This will be the last time I reply to you, until you stick to the topic. Edited July 4 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 5 hours ago, Moonbox said: 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. OK Ukraine is doing more damage with less ammo, i think i said that a few times....Now your saying Russian arty is not translating into battle field effect....But Ukraine is reporting 80 % of all their casualties are from Russian arty...thats pretty effective in any world, country, or planet...thats not a math look thats ukraine reporting where they are taking tthe bulk of their casualties from... Russian doctrine...Russia success on the battlefield is measured on ground taken....not by men or equipment losses... Perhaps look at different maps, The maps that have been shown don't have a date stamp, nor do they show any true scale....not sure what to tell you... i see in some cases 10 t0 20 km of advances...ABC, CNN, BBC, CBC, most european media outlets, ukraines media outlets...basically are all telling the same story... You can play with this map, maybe you'll get more out of it, Note yellow areas are recent Russian gains red are under Russian control, black border areas were Russia before the war...these gains are not blades of grass but measured in KM's....It gets updated on a regulars basis every couple of days... there are other maps you can look at , they all tell the same tale....this one is provided by ukraine...so no russian bias. You have access to actual accurate measuring devices so advances are tracked down to the meter... MAP scale can be adjusted to suit your needs, i think it is fair to say Russian advances have made some head way...atleast in the major battlefield zones... like Bakhmut,Horlivka etc... https://understandingwar.maps.arcgis.com/apps/instant/3dviewer/index.html?appid=1602762dbcde419bb957dea358449580 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 (edited) 4 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: The Russian leaders know full well that they would definitely not survive a nuclear war against the West. It's one thing to brag, knowing an event will never happen. I could brag that I could defeat Georges St.Pierre in a fight, but that does not necessarily make it true. NATO has not sent troops into Ukraine officially, since it would lead to a World War, and catastrophic results for the World. NATO obviously would defeat Russia, but it would be at too great a cost. A better question would be "Why has Russia not declared war on the countries that continue to arm and aid Ukraine?" Because they can't win a war against NATO. I don't think you understand that being able to defeat a nation in war, does not mean it's wise to do so. China could defeat India in an all-out war, but aside from relatively minor border skirmishes, the two countries remain at an uneasy peace, since they are both aware of the negative consequences of a major war. Russia and Putin have made many threats, some pertaining to escalation and not ruling out nuclear weapons. The intelligence community is well aware that Russia is bluffing, and continue to disregard threats of escalation going on over two years. Putin can threaten NATO with nuclear weapons until he is blue in the face. He will never use nuclear weapons against any NATO country, so why even discuss it? Of course. Having said that, do you trust Trump even having access to the nuclear code, or any top military secrets, after his term in office? Giving humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine is the right thing to do, considering Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, a nation much smaller, and with a history of being persecuted by Russia to the point of genocide (Holodomor). This is just common sense. Even in prison, if a small guy fights a bully enough times, other inmates will get sick of it, and offer the smaller man shanks, and weapons eventually. Were you a guy who cheered on the neighbourhood bully while he victimised smaller children? You obviously have not read the NATO charter. NATO was created in response to Soviet aggression in the aftermath of World War 2, when the US, Canada, UK, and others got together, and pledged that they would go to war against Russia/USSR in one of the members were attacked. They key word being "MEMBERS." That is what the priority of NATO is. Why do you think Russia has never bothered to try and reclaim Lithuania, Latvia, or Estonia? They can't because NATO would invoke article 5, and immediately deploy troops to fight the Russian army- something that Russia is terrified of. Strange...I can't recall you saying that. LMAO....please tell me you are joking. Putin is as diplomatic as Hitler was. Russia is losing men at a ratio of nearly 2:1. Here's a titbit of information for you: People get killed in war. You must have a source for that right... You have said plenty of times NATO is not afraid or concerned with Russia< now your saying it would be at great cost , sure it would...as it is coming at a great cost to Ukraine... Your assuming that this war with NATO if that happens is winnable, by conventional means, but once Putin starts to loss face and is backed into a corner do you think he is going to be a good loser...or push the button...I mean your pretty confident he won't but really your assuming he won't , thats something you'd bet your life on... There are many organizations that track all of the global events and measure them in time remain until nuclear exchanges do happen...the global clock has never been this close to everything going up in a mushroom cloud... I don't really trust trump with the codes either...but atleast he knows what planet he is on... I think most nations leaders are somewhat aware of what war costs, and yet, we have had 2 world wars todate, not a great track record consider what both of them cost, and we are still willing to cross that line and go to war... We are discussing it becasue it seems that NATO is very concerned about escalating becasue It may turn ugly,,,they are not as confident as you are that putin will not press the button...or NATO would not be concern about sinking billions into BMD tech, or upgrading it's own nuclear arsenals... Quote Were you a guy who cheered on the neighbourhood bully while he victimised smaller children? Not even sure what you mean by this... So what your really saying is NATO does not give a rats ass about Ukraine, it is not going to risk going to war.... ....which is fine, but lets face it Ukraine is not going to have this stalemate without NATO support, which is just maintaining a stalemate...not sure why you can not see that...what you cant see either is Ukraine can not maintain a stalemate forever , Russia has much more resources than Ukraine does, IT CAN"T WIN A WAR OF ATTRITION, which is what this has turned out to be... Strange i've underlined in bold several times, maybe go back and reread some of my posts... Ukraine might not have a choice but to start talks, Ukraine does not have the resources to fight Russia... not in equipment or Manpower...somehow your against talking , but you don't have any skin in the game do you...Ukraine is hurting for manpower...NATO is not going to provide enough support to change the battlefield...so what options are left...I'm asking you becasue you seem to have all the answers ? Here's a tidbit of info for you, i'm well aware of what happens in war, and all of it that war brings...i spent plenty of time in a war zone....not watching it on TV but rather in person....i think your not understanding what is at stake here...Ukraine is being bleed out...by Russia, NATO is only providing a trickle in support, enough to just keep the Russians from over running the country...Nobody is wanting Russia to win this conflict, but it is not happening right now, unless NATO steps up...with more in the way of support... Quote But Moscow has plenty more troops to throw into the fight - and Ukraine does not. The Commander of US Forces in Europe, General Christopher Cavoli, has warned that unless the US rushes significantly more weapons and ammunition to Ukraine then its forces will be outgunned on the battlefield by ten to one. Mass matters. The Russian army's tactics, leadership and equipment may be inferior to Ukraine's, but it has such superiority in numbers, especially artillery, that if it does nothing else this year, its default option will be to keep pushing Ukraine's forces back in a westward direction, taking village after village. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68778338 What does this guy know....he is just a general in charge of all US troops in Europe....I think the article says a lot of the same talking points i've been pointing out... I guess i'm not the only one screaming for NATO to take some action... Edited July 4 by Army Guy Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 (edited) 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: [quote]Your assuming that this war is winnable, by conventional means, but once Putin starts to loss face and is backed into a corner do you think he is going to be a good loser...or push the button...I mean your pretty confident he won't but really your assuming he won't , thats something you'd bet your life on... lol....Putin is not going to "push the button" on nuclear warheads. To date, only Adolf Hitler (who was a complete drug addict by 1944), wanted his generals to raze every single German landmark, building, etc. to the ground in anticipation of the Soviet army capturing Berlin. His generals ignored him. Putin has far less pull with his generals than Hitler did with the Nazi brass. You are not thinking this through with common sense. Even if Putin wished to end the World by deploying nukes against NATO countries (or anyone else for that matter), he would far more likely meet his demise with a bullet in the back of his skull by one of his generals, who actually want Russia to exist. It's like you do not understand basic human psychology. At any rate, I have grown tired of discussing an issue that will never come to fruition- Putin deploying nuclear warheads, if he is backed into a corner. I have better things to do, than debate absurd and ridiculous theories. Edited July 4 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 (edited) 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: OK Ukraine is doing more damage with less ammo, i think i said that a few times....Now your saying Russian arty is not translating into battle field effect....But Ukraine is reporting 80 % of all their casualties are from Russian arty...thats pretty effective in any world, 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. 1 hour ago, Army Guy said: Perhaps look at different maps, The maps that have been shown don't have a date stamp, nor do they show any true scale....not sure what to tell you... i see in some cases 10 t0 20 km of advances...ABC, CNN, BBC, CBC, most european media outlets, ukraines media outlets...basically are all telling the same story... 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. Edited July 4 by Moonbox 2 Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUI_Offender Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 (edited) 8 hours ago, Moonbox said: 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. Let's be frank. If Russia gained 10 metres in a month, in battles with Ukraine, the Putin apologists would be holding it up as a "major offensive" into Ukrainian territory. I can see him doing it, if Russia gained 20 cm in a month. Edited July 4 by DUI_Offender Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 1 hour ago, Moonbox said: At that rate, Russia will complete their conquest of the Donbas in...what? 2040? It'll only cost them 7,000,000 dead. I swear, it has been the same story for 3 years now. Russia is going to steam roll Ukraine on their initial invasion! This is the big Russian offensive, Ukraine won't be able to hold them back... over and over again. Not saying Army Guy is cheering them on, but some of the others on this thread certainly come across that way. Hell, we are seeing this nonsense play out in real time on this thread, with Nationalist over a month ago saying Ukraine was stretched too thin to stop them and had no more men to stop them and this was a big Russian offensive! Here we are over a month later... guess what, Russia is stopped. Ukraine is still fighting. They didn't run out of men or get run over. 2 Quote LOL, when people have to tell you they are ignoring you... From Robosmith: "IGNORE AWARDED DUE TO WORTHLESS POSTS. BYE." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perspektiv Posted July 4 Author Report Share Posted July 4 8 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: You are getting schooled How so? All I see is a difference in opinion on how this conflict could or should be resolved. You telling me am being "schooled", vs specifically pointing out to how, make it your opinion. 8 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: Trump The irony, is you're using to deflect from the fact you don't have a solid counter argument. I explained the use of the name, and you chose to make it the center of attention. Sounds like you're schooling yourself o_O. 8 hours ago, DUI_Offender said: This will be the last time I reply to you Oh, now you're the bigger person, and can't bear to bring yourself down to another person's level? Funny how that timing occurs on you losing an argument or having nothing to bring to the table. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 13 hours ago, Moonbox said: 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. You refuse to believe that Russian arty are having an large impact on the battlefield...in fact the largest impact for russian forces, it is still responsible for killing close to hundred ukrainians each day... The maps you showed do not show the scale of the battlefield, or small gains by Russians...the map i provided does just that, it shows the progress of battles that happen this week in yellow...i take it you have not taken a look, some of these gains are multi kms in depth...all of it runs contrary to your statement that there has been no gains, or very little gains. You still don't get it...Russia does not care about losses, it counts success by territory gained, each one of those media outlets have said that much in their articles....The fact they are still advancing is telling is it not, NATO current support is keeping this conflict at the stalemate level...with Russia making small gains everyday.... This conflict is not going to take until 2040, Ukraine will have been bleed dry well before that...Ukraine will meet a tipping point where Russian advances will gain more ground,much more quicker with fewer losses...They did the same thing with the NAZI's.... And Ukraine is also taking heavy losses that it can not replace as easily as Russia can, Ukraine will run out of resources well before Russia....Unless NATO steps up and increases it's support....that should be obvious to anyone. It leaves only a couple of options for Ukraine since it can not win a war of attrition........Convince NATO to step up its support....or in the near future sit down and talk to Russia...If NATO does not increase it's support... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted July 4 Report Share Posted July 4 11 hours ago, User said: I swear, it has been the same story for 3 years now. Russia is going to steam roll Ukraine on their initial invasion! This is the big Russian offensive, Ukraine won't be able to hold them back... over and over again. Not saying Army Guy is cheering them on, but some of the others on this thread certainly come across that way. Hell, we are seeing this nonsense play out in real time on this thread, with Nationalist over a month ago saying Ukraine was stretched too thin to stop them and had no more men to stop them and this was a big Russian offensive! Here we are over a month later... guess what, Russia is stopped. Ukraine is still fighting. They didn't run out of men or get run over. It is not my intention to cheerlead the Russians, i was just pointing out Ukrainian forces are now fatigued and can not go toe to toe with the Russias in a war of attrition without NATO stepping up in its support ...currently that support level sees Russia making steady gains... I spend a lot of time listening to podcasts interviewing volunteers that are fighting in Ukraine, these guys are telling a much different story...for the most part Ukrainian forces are on the defensive...due to a lot of things, the most important ones are lack of ammo, and equipment, and many more factors...Then there are the statements form other nations generals staff, the most recent one from US commander of US troops in Europe he states Ukraine is not going to win this fight unless NATO steps up it's support...i don't think he is a russian supporter...i think he see the writing on the wall... It is very true NOBODY thought that Ukraine could pull off what they have...they showed the world with NATO support they could and did go on the offensive and pushed russia forces back, in almost every sector...NATO support dwindled and Russia took advantage of that and we see it in Russian gains....So it is no secret Ukraine is capable of pushing back the Russians, but THEY need NATO support to do that... As for running out of men, the sad fact is they are now running low on this resource , recently they have taken a page out of Russia handbook and started to empty out its prisons... also by changing the age in which they conscript, changing medical standards, the list goes on.... you don't do that unless there is a problem....Even Ukrainian military figures are stating their are manpower shortages... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.