War in Ukraine

#32,778
#32,778
volgr said:
Why didnt they declare war, fully mobilize and crush Ukraine in a month? Is that what you are asking?
Click to expand...
Because they anticipated a 3 day excursion to Ukraine and that they would roll them fast and claim the entire country for themselves.

Almost 90 days later and their combat effectiveness DECIMATED, they are starting to realize that they chose poorly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, NorthDallas40, USF grad in TN and 1 other person
#32,779
#32,779
Rasputin_Vol said:
You would be correct about it being a quagmire if they occupied Western Ukraine. But that is where the Poles and Hungarians are for.

But with regards to the east and south, there won't be any problems at all. Crimea should show you that thus far. No insurgency uprisings or anything of the sort there.
Click to expand...

Well said. Scott Ritter makes an interesting point in that, IF (big ifs here in his scenario) Ukraine is given time to reconstitute it's military and enough heavy western weapons make their way into Ukraine (to which the reconstituted force will be adequately trained on, unlike the situation now), just because Russia ends its special military operation doesnt mean Ukraine will stop fighting. Whatever is left of Ukraine, in this possible scenario, could be a huge headache for Russia.
 
#32,780
#32,780
DonjoVol said:
Yeah but that 40 billion will bring Russia to its knees.
Click to expand...
You're really worried about American tax dollars and what its going to do against Russia. Is it the inevitable high tech building of the Ukrainian military once Russia turns tail and runs that bothers you the most? Or is it that you exasperated your combat effectiveness on absolute folly and now the world knows anyone with a little American training and some new gear can kick the sh!t out of yall?

Inquiring minds want to know!
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, NorthDallas40 and AM64
#32,781
#32,781
FLVOL_79 said:
Because they anticipated a 3 day excursion to Ukraine and that they would roll them fast and claim the entire country for themselves.

Almost 90 days later and their combat effectiveness DECIMATED, they are starting to realize that they chose poorly.
Click to expand...

You first paragraph is somewhat reasonable, then you go full retard in the second. This is why having a reasonable discussion with most of you isnt possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DonjoVol
#32,784
#32,784
volgr said:
You first paragraph is somewhat reasonable, then you go full retard in the second. This is why having a reasonable discussion with most of you isnt possible.
Click to expand...
Your understanding of military tactics, let alone combat effectiveness, is..well....retarded is too nice of a word and I wouldn't want to offend anyone who is mentally handicapped and not by their own choosing.

Try harder Comrade! Earn those rubles!
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#32,786
#32,786
MontyPython said:
Heh. Funny stuff.

You can add to Russia's stellar record the following achievement as well: They've lost nearly TWICE as many men in less than 3 months than they did in their entire 10 year war with Afghanistan. Bravo, Mr. Fletcher!

Most pundits are expecting a stalemate for the next couple months for various reasons. Seems reasonable.

I suspect by later this summer - when Ukraine has another 50 to 100K fresh troops or so added to its ranks - that's when Ukraine will begin advancing in earnest and claw back the land taken by Russia. Between now and then, of course, the Russian army will likely actually continue to shrink, since Putin has failed to go all in on conscription like Ukraine. And, oh yeah,, 15-20 tanks explodied/abandoned per day equals over 1,000 more tanks gone in 2-3 months. Pity.

With the huge influx of heavy weapons from the west (including Harpoon missiles as of today), it'll take awhile to train their troops, get their ducks in a row and pivot to full-on offense. But I'm confident that when this happens - barring WMDs - Ukraine will pound the static Russian lines backwards with artillery and various other means until they simply dissolve altogether.

In the meantime, mid-Donbas is gonna be a meat grinder for both sides. Ukraine is playing defense, which means Russia will suffer around 3X more casualties than they will.

Time to simply bleed Putin dry.
Click to expand...

Part of this Scott Ritter addresses, which I brough up a few posts back. The possolible reconstitution of Ukraine forces is a big problem for Russia on the horizon. They likely declare war and fully mobilize if this continues to look likely. Then they fight NATO in Ukraine.

As for the Donbas, it is picking up speed. Your ratio is backwards at best. Ukrainian forces are dying 4:1. The Donbas will be well within Russian control before the above reconstitution scenario plays out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#32,787
#32,787
volgr said:
No. Try again.
Click to expand...
volgr said:
If we cant defend it, we lose it. I live in the real world, not the one where rainbow unicorns respect sovereign borders.
Click to expand...

In other words we should live at a state of war with our neighbors - that they have no obligation to respect property rights and borders ... and that's your version of diplomacy. To the bully go the spoils? And I suppose we shouldn't spend anything on defense either. Guess it's time to close down the UN and any other organizations dedicated to maintaining common sense and something resembling peace and live in anarchy.
 
#32,790
#32,790
volgr said:
Why didnt they declare war, fully mobilize and crush Ukraine in a month? Is that what you are asking?
Click to expand...
I'm asking why they didn't use more resources and crush them when they started this thing if they could have. It really doesn't matter whether you call it a war or not. Why don't they do it now?
 
#32,793
#32,793
AM64 said:
No, Turkey, the new girl on the block, is being exposed as an extortionist. Let them in the club and they stink it up with their ME ethics. Screw Turkey.
Click to expand...

Actually this has become a standard thing with Erdogan. He does it to the EU on issues all the time and has done it to NATO where he threatens to veto something and everyone agrees to pay Turkey some amount of cash or provide something it wants and the veto gets dropped. We don't make a big deal out of it because of Turkey's incredibly important geographic position, particularly the Bosphorus.

But it's not just us, remember the big pissing match he got into with the Russians in Syria. One minute it's white hot and then nothing. They gave him whatever it was he wanted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#32,794
#32,794
AM64 said:
If the diplomatic effort doesn't require Russia to leave all of Ukraine to Ukraine, then it's wrong to begin with. Otherwise it's a negotiated capitulation of Ukrainian soil to an aggressor which can be repeated again and again. Why would you try diplomacy when the other side has nothing to lose and you have a decent chance of improving your position by continued fighting? Or are we just saying it's OK to chew off a bit of a neighboring country every now and then because you feel like it and they have something you want?
Click to expand...
I really take issue with us negotiating in place of Ukraine unless we have a list of requirements from Ukraine. Like you said it’s negotiated capitulation if Russia is allowed to keep one square inch of Ukrainian territory and that is only a decision Ukraine can make.
 
  • Like
Reactions: allvol123 and AM64
#32,795
#32,795
NorthDallas40 said:
I really take issue with us negotiating in place of Ukraine unless we have a list of requirements from Ukraine. Like you said it’s negotiated capitulation if Russia is allowed to keep one square inch of Ukrainian territory and that is only a decision Ukraine can make.
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree, and probably any US court would say that we didn't have standing to negotiate for another country unless they asked us directly to represent them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#32,796
#32,796
MontyPython said:
Heh. Funny stuff.

You can add to Russia's stellar record the following achievement as well: They've lost nearly TWICE as many men in less than 3 months than they did in their entire 10 year war with Afghanistan. Bravo, Mr. Fletcher!

Most pundits are expecting a stalemate for the next couple months for various reasons. Seems reasonable.

I suspect by later this summer - when Ukraine has another 50 to 100K fresh troops or so added to its ranks - that's when Ukraine will begin advancing in earnest and claw back the land taken by Russia. Between now and then, of course, the Russian army will likely actually continue to shrink, since Putin has failed to go all in on conscription like Ukraine. And, oh yeah,, 15-20 tanks explodied/abandoned per day equals over 1,000 more tanks gone in 2-3 months. Pity.

With the huge influx of heavy weapons from the west (including Harpoon missiles as of today), it'll take awhile to train their troops, get their ducks in a row and pivot to full-on offense. But I'm confident that when this happens - barring WMDs - Ukraine will pound the static Russian lines backwards with artillery and various other means until they simply dissolve altogether.

In the meantime, mid-Donbas is gonna be a meat grinder for both sides. Ukraine is playing defense, which means Russia will suffer around 3X more casualties than they will.

Time to simply bleed Putin dry.
Click to expand...

Do we know what version of the Harpoon and its range?
 
#32,799
#32,799
volgr said:
If we cant defend it, we lose it. I live in the real world, not the one where rainbow unicorns respect sovereign borders.
Click to expand...
So then america was ok to invade iraq, Libya, syria, basically everywhere but afghanistan because they couldnt stop us. And it took more than a decade for afghanistan to convince us to leave.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top