War in Ukraine

#31,602
#31,602
volbound1700 said:
True and our crisis are still pennies compared to what generations in the past went through. Think about being born in 1900 and having to go through the Titanic, WW1, Bird Flu, Great Depression, Dustbowl, WW2, and perhaps even Korean War and Cuban Missile Crises.
Click to expand...

My grandmother was born in 1906 and passed in 1987, she remembered seeing seeing her first car.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, InVOLuntary and AM64
#31,606
#31,606
825VOL said:
Maybe the Poles are just offering to cover the Ukrainian northern flank in case Russia or Belarus send troops back into Ukraine. This would allow Ukraine to move troops from the Kiev area to their eastern front. This sounds like a good tactical move.
Click to expand...
Except for putting your troops into an active warzone. Cross that border armed and you are a fair target.

If that happens and the russians bomb those Poles, NATO should sit on its hands.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#31,607
#31,607
LouderVol said:
Except for putting your troops into an active warzone. Cross that border armed and you are a fair target.

If that happens and the russians bomb those Poles, NATO should sit on its hands.
Click to expand...

NATO is only obligated to defend if Russia attacked Poland on their own land. Basically if Poland is helping Ukraine, they lose NATO protection since Poland would technically be the aggressor (or co-belligerent)
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and tvolsfan
#31,610
#31,610
volbound1700 said:
NATO is only obligated to defend if Russia attacked Poland on their own land. Basically if Poland is helping Ukraine, they lose NATO protection since Poland would technically be the aggressor (or co-belligerent)
Click to expand...
That's how I see it. I feel the same about Poland securing a border as I did about the no fly zone. No way, stay out of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, NorthDallas40, volbound1700 and 1 other person
#31,611
#31,611
volbound1700 said:
Yeah, Lviv and Western Ukraine until the end of WW1 was part of Poland-Lithuania and then Austria/Austria-Hungary. It was never really in the Russian Empire until Stalin ate the Eastern part of Poland in 1939.
Click to expand...
You could move the clock back in 50 year increments and set tons of weird borders.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, InVOLuntary and AM64
#31,612
#31,612
LouderVol said:
That's how I see it. I feel the same about Poland securing a border as I did about the no fly zone. No way, stay out of it.
Click to expand...

I mean, it would still be a very touchy situation and would escalate the conflict significantly. If Russia went into Poland, although NATO isn't obligated to intervene, it would create a dilemma on how much NATO would tolerate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#31,614
#31,614
volbound1700 said:
I mean, it would still be a very touchy situation and would escalate the conflict significantly. If Russia went into Poland, although NATO isn't obligated to intervene, it would create a dilemma on how much NATO would tolerate.
Click to expand...
Poland definitely feels like the dog snapping at Russia just barely being restrained by the leash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, NorthDallas40 and 1 other person
#31,615
#31,615
volkyries said:
We need to go back to traditional American values which start with breastfeeding our children. Formula was a departure from traditional family values...basically fast food for babies.
Click to expand...
How dare you forget about the trans non birthing bodies raising their babies on formula because evil science made them something they disagree with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, volkyries and 1 other person
#31,616
#31,616
Hunerwadel said:
Turkey is likely looking for something in return. They'll come around. Besides IMO NATO would rather have Sweden and Finland than Turkey. Turkey is not as strategically important as they once were since we're not playing in the sandbox anymore. While Turkey receives most of their energy from Russia I don't really think Edrogan wants to become a Russian puppet.
Click to expand...
All Turkey has going for it is they are totally not holding a bunch of nuclear missiles for the US which were for meant to land in the Soviet Union. Nope, none at all..
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64 and Hunerwadel
#31,617
#31,617
LouderVol said:
You could move the clock back in 50 year increments and set tons of weird borders.
Click to expand...

The 1914 boundaries were more even set. I do think the breakup of Austria-Hungary was one of the major geopolitical mistakes of the 20th Century. The Balkans has been problematic since then.

Keep in mind that Nationalism really didn't start to even come about until the 19th Century. Prior to that, most of the time, people groups could care less about living together and were more focused on the royal family ruling them. In Austria-Hungary, the Hapsburgs were actually the glue that was keeping the entire thing together as various groups such as the Austrians, Czechs, Slovaks, and Hungarians all still considered the Hapsburgs to be their rulers. Only the Serbs (who recently fell under Hapsburgs) were truly rebellions. Most of the groups were annoyed at the Hungarians, however who misused their autonomy to bully other groups that lived under their rule (Croats for example as Croatia had been part of the Kingdom of Hungary since late Medieval era).
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#31,618
#31,618
FLVOL_79 said:
All Turkey has going for it is they are totally not holding a bunch of nuclear missiles for the US which were for meant to land in the Soviet Union. Nope, none at all..
Click to expand...

I disagree. To the USA, Turkey is massively important for several reasons:

1. Maintain peace in the Middle East. We do not need another hostile nation in the ME stirring up trouble. Turkey is a very strong power in that region and could cause a lot of havoc if they start behaving like Iran for example
2. Turkey controls access to Black Sea
3. Turkey is close to Israel and tends to play nice with Israel
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, EasternVol and AM64
#31,622
#31,622
volbound1700 said:
Russia is so overrated at fighting.

The Soviet Union gets so much credit for defeating Germany in WW2 but they had a lot of help.

1. Germany moved 5th Panzer to Italy instead of Stalingrad due to Operation Torch and Hitler's desire to keep North Africa. This contributed to Germany not having any German divisions to relieve Stalingrad
2. At Kursk, USSR received tons of intel from the British that basically told them where Germany was attacking, with what they were attacking, and most importantly allowed Russia to take out most of the Luftwaffe before the battle ruining the pivotal offensive. USSR was also heavily supplied by USA equipment via lend-lease for the battle helping their own offensives. Even Stalin admitted that without US Trucks and AAs, the Soviet Offensives would NOT have been possible
3. Germany became heavily overextended fighting in Italy, eventually France, and Eastern Front contributing to more and more USSR victories

Russia has struggled heavily in offensive wars (Crimean War, Russo-Japanese War, and even WW1 show that). Russia's best victories have come in situations where they led the enemy into their own land and used terrain to beat their enemy (Great Northern War, Napoleonic Wars, WW2). The only true offensive war that saw Russia perform very well was the Seven Years War against Prussia and Prussia was also having to fight Austria, France, and Sweden in that war.

Russia got Poland thanks to a partitioned that saw Austria and Prussia working with them. They got Ukraine partially because Ukrainians had a choice between the Muslim Ottomans or Christian Orthodox Russians (seems like a no brainer figuring in that Ukrainians were Christian Orthodox and the Ottomans were notorious for their brutality and murder of Christians). No one really lived in Siberia so they basically beat up technologically inferior nomadic tribes such as Kazan, Uzbeks, and a very, very weakened Mongolian Empire.

Russia did have some nice wins in the 1700s against the Ottomans and Sweden. Interestingly, the era that saw the best performance for the Russian Army was under two female rulers Czar Elizabeth (who doesn't get enough credit as a great leader; it was probably because she chose the moron Peter the III to replace her instead of Catherine) and Czar Catherine the Great.

In summary, despite claiming a lot of land, Russia has been one of the weakest military nations historically. A lot of their wins have been using defensive tactics so it makes sense they are struggling in a major offensive campaign. They really haven't had a great offensive campaign in their history. Part of the problem always relates to corruption in their army and poor logistics which is what is hurting them now.
Click to expand...

I didnt read this but I agree with the first sentence.
 
#31,623
#31,623
Hunerwadel said:
That deal would have been nothing but a land grab. A deal would have been for Ukraine's promise to not join NATO and Russia would completely and permanently withdraw from all Ukrainian territories.
Click to expand...

You say land grab, Russia would say protecting Russians in Donbas and southern Ukraine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#31,624
#31,624
Septic said:
Can you elaborate on the "losing badly" part?

Russia (a so called world super power) positioned it's Army for months to invade and still hasn't conquered a town 100 miles from it's border.
Click to expand...

Depends on their strategic goals on how they want to take and control the territory. What does it matter if they took it last month or take it next month?
 
#31,625
#31,625
volgr said:
Considering global tensions currently, I need to hear more from DeSantis regarding foreign policy. Outside of that, he is preferable to Trump in almost every way. Trump bringing up the Johnson and Johnson guy the other day at his rally, bragging on the vaccine and how rich the guy was, shows how Trump has become detached from his base. Also, he continues to make horrendous picks like Dr. Oz and would likely continue to make terrible staff hires. He doesn't seem to have learned from his many failures as President.
Click to expand...

Was his biggest problem when he was president.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top