War in Ukraine

#33,055
#33,055
NorthDallas40 said:
I do disagree with his description of events. And I can’t wait to see those funds redirected to Ukraine once the invading bastards are throw out.
Click to expand...
His description as to why it needs to be paid in rubles seems to be reasonable and understanding. Plus it is their product and if they insist it be paid in rubles then I do not see what the issue is. As he explained it these countries have been essentially getting Russian oil and gas for free. It seems like Russia insisting that it be paid in rubles would piss off the western bankers as well.
 
#33,057
#33,057
DonjoVol said:
Okay. I am going to post this full interview again. You can skip to the 37 minute mark and watch to about the 39 minute 30 second mark. That is 2 and a half minutes of your time. If Lavrov is wrong then please feel free to elaborate more.

Click to expand...


Medvedev was on a roll yesterday..."cosmic cretinism", lol...very accurately labeled.

Medvedev agreed that without wheat and other food supplies from Russia, the importing countries would “have a very difficult time,” especially, he noted, because, without Russian fertilisers, “only juicy weeds [would] grow” on their fields.

“Well ... that’s sad. They’ve got themselves to blame,” he wrote.

In Medvedev’s opinion, the West is now “backing up” because “all these hellish sanctions are worthless when it comes to vital things,” such as food or energy.
Sanctions interfere with everyone’s desire to live a normal, prosperous life, the former Russian president argued.

The expansion of NATO and the “mess with the calculations of debts, payments and other things” have aggravated the situation, he said.
“And what interferes the most is [the West’s] own cosmic cretinism,” he claimed.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#33,058
#33,058
DonjoVol said:
His description as to why it needs to be paid in rubles seems to be reasonable and understanding. Plus it is their product and if they insist it be paid in rubles then I do not see what the issue is. As he explained it these countries have been essentially getting Russian oil and gas for free. It seems like Russia insisting that it be paid in rubles would piss off the western bankers as well.
Click to expand...
Because it’s a violation of the contract terms. By making that demand they are in default of the contracts. It’s that simple.

If Russia isn’t getting paid then turn off the gas. Go ahead. But Russia keeps it on trying to play the long game and placate the EU to let their labs grab go ahead. Actions have consequences. If we ever annex a part of Mexico or Canada by force I’d hope we get slapped in the same fashion. That’s only fair and consistent
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#33,061
#33,061
volgr said:
Well Russia has hit 2 barracks in the last couple days. The first one Zelensky describes a massive loss of life. Easy to run up the score when you get 200:0 to 300:0 rates. Ukraine doesn't even know their death toll because they are no longer claiming or burying their dead and compounding the problem is they don't know if the missing are desertion or dead. A couple months ago it may have been closer to 1:1 to 2:1 in favor of Russia...but the last couple months have been brutal. Also, in the last month seeing more pics of dead middle aged Ukrainian fighting men. As I said, 4:1 at this point may be generous to Ukraine.
Click to expand...

So, the one-off Russian missile hitting a training barracks has exactly nothing to do with the kill ratios in Donbas.

Given that you provide no link for your insane 4:1 Ukrainian:Russian death ration in Donbas, we can all safely assume that - like most of your garbage posts and absurd theories here - you're just pulling sh*t straight out of your ass.

In reality, Ukraine is killing Russians probably around a 3:1 ratio in Donbas since they're dug in heavily and have air, armor and artillery support - a ratio that comports with common warfare offense:defense casualty rates.

TLDR: @volgr is full of sh*t.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and NorthDallas40
#33,062
#33,062
volgr said:
That is everyone, dumb dumb. Which is why the EU is now buying Russian gas in Rubles.
Click to expand...


You do have a funny way of looking at things. It's just a hand. I've seen it before.

Any dependency is crashing to a trickle and it's only the start. We got plans. russia is not part of them anymore. You can thank putin.
 
#33,065
#33,065
volgr said:
Thats what YOU think they tried to do. Again, explain how they take Mariupol under the conditions they did but not be able to take Kyiv.
Click to expand...
Jesus someone is really channeling their inner Zhukov here.

Mauripol is directly on the border, kiev is more than 200 miles away. They were literally able to land attack Mauripol from day one, with no logistical issues. They got somewhat near Kiev in a two weeks, and then sat there for a month. So the evidence points to logistics being a factor. As easy as it was for Russia to resupply and reinforce its forces in Mauripol, it would be that easy for Ukraine to do the same in Kiev. And we already saw the Russians struggle with supplying their push on Kiev, just like we saw Ukraine struggle to supply Mauripol. So the russians would lose their big advantage, and hand it to the Ukrainians in an attack on Kiev.

Mauripol had a population of 440k, Kiev 2,884k. So 6x the size. Did russia have a force 6x what they used on Mauripol to take Kiev? If it took 6x as long to fall as Mauripol it would be almost three times the length of the Battle of Stalingrad. That points to it being a very sizable fight for anyone.

Beyond being able to get new troops and supplies easier at Mauripol than they would at Kiev they were fighting from friendly territory, prepared positions. So if a unit was badly hurt or needed to resupply or rest, they wouldnt have to pull back far, and they could do so to prepared positions, making it easier to accommodate the logistics, speeding up their attacks. At kiev they would have to push farther, into enemy territory, not have prepared positions to resupply or rest from. And likely this would require them having to cycle units from further back from the front lines which complicates things as well.

Basically Mauripol was as good of an attacking posistion as Russia was going to get, and as bad for Ukraine as it was going to get. Kiev may not be the complete opposite, but it would be a significant swing that would favor the Ukrianians. Would it matter in the end? Idk. But there are plenty of military reasons to see a difference in the Russians taking Mauripol vs Kiev.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, AM64, Septic and 1 other person
#33,070
#33,070
MontyPython said:
So, the one-off Russian missile hitting a training barracks has exactly nothing to do with the kill ratios in Donbas.

Given that you provide no link for your insane 4:1 Ukrainian:Russian death ration in Donbas, we can all safely assume that - like most of your garbage posts and absurd theories here - you're just pulling sh*t straight out of your ass.

In reality, Ukraine is killing Russians probably around a 3:1 ratio in Donbas since they're dug in heavily and have air, armor and artillery support - a ratio that comports with common warfare offense:defense casualty rates.

TLDR: @volgr is full of sh*t.
Click to expand...

One off? It's at least the 3rd barracks that has been hit, 2 of which were mass causality events. The other one just happened today, we'll see what casualty numbers are reported. Are you asking for a general ratio for the entire war or just the Donbas? Not that it really matters. I think currently, for the entire war, it is conservatively 4:1. If Russians were dying as much as you wrongly think, they would likely have had to mobilize by now. The fact they haven't is a good indicator that your ratio's are way off.

No one really knows what Ukraine losses are, including yourself for the reasons I gave in my last post. However, they are very high in the Donbas and have become increasingly high over the last month. There is no evidence to the contrary other than the ridiculous figures given by Ukrainian sources (that have also perpetrated a number of hoaxes and false stories to the extent they are no longer believable).
 
#33,074
#33,074
LouderVol said:
Mauripol had a population of 440k, Kiev 2,884k. So 6x the size. Did russia have a force 6x what they used on Mauripol to take Kiev? If it took 6x as long to fall as Mauripol it would be almost three times the length of the Battle of Stalingrad. That points to it being a very sizable fight for anyone.
Click to expand...

Exactly. So was Russia's goal to take Kyiv? No. Was it because they COULDN'T take Kyiv? No. As Mariupol shows, they can take large well protected Ukrainian cities, when they want to. Now, are there more logistical challenges to taking Kyiv? Of course, but this notion that Russia wanted to take it but couldn't is quite honestly ridiculous. They didn't have near the manpower or logistics to do it. So either their leadership was ridiculously incompetent in regards to Kyiv but quite brilliant in Mariupol, or their goal was never to take Kyiv and those who say Kyiv was a feint are likely accurate in their assessment.
 
#33,075
#33,075
DonjoVol said:
Okay. I am going to try and shift here and see who wants to have an actual conversation or who is just simply interested in hot takes and outrage. The following is Michael Millerman giving a brief overview of who Alexander Dugin is. This is from 7 years ago. Some of us, like myself, have already been educated in Dugin and his philosophy. Not saying I agree with it but to better understand Putin and Russia and their current situation and attitude towards the west it is important to understand Dugin.

Click to expand...

Dugin is a fascist who wants to annex a lot of territory. Not sure what we need to understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top