War in Ukraine

"stalemate"

"stalemate"

 
I’m waiting for you to point out what I was wrong about.

OK. Here were your 2 posts on glide bombs and Avdiivka:

I'm not wrong at all in my post. Glide bombs aren't going to win this war for russia anymore than more ground based anti-aircraft systems are going to win it for Ukraine. Come on MacAthur impress us with your vast military strategy knowledge and explain to us what Ukraine needs to "stop Russia in it's tracks".

You don't know **** about anything since you haven't been able to back up any of your wild ass claims in this thread. It wasn't glide bombs that took the city, it was an overwhelming number of infantry and armor backed by artillery that took the city.

Per the Forbes article:

"Crude glide-bombs (KABs)—with pop-out wings and bolt-on satellite-guidance kits—arguably are the decisive weapons in the 25th month of Russia’s wider war on Ukraine. Possibly more decisive than explosive first-person-view drones. Possibly even more-so than the traditional king of battle: artillery."

Dropping a hundred or more KAB glide-bombs a day from as far away as 40 miles, Russian air force Sukhoi fighter-bombers systematically demolish Ukrainian defenses, easing the way for Russian army assault groups to advance, albeit still at great cost.

KABs are a major reason the Ukrainian garrison in the eastern city Avdiivka ultimately retreated last month following a brutal, four-month battle."


So there it is in black and white, gramps.

Please stop wasting my time.

Link to Article:

@hog88 Doesn't Know How to Read
 
Last edited:
OK. Here were your 2 posts on glide bombs and Avdiivka:





Per the Forbes article:

"Crude glide-bombs (KABs)—with pop-out wings and bolt-on satellite-guidance kits—arguably are the decisive weapons in the 25th month of Russia’s wider war on Ukraine. Possibly more decisive than explosive first-person-view drones. Possibly even more-so than the traditional king of battle: artillery."

Dropping a hundred or more KAB glide-bombs a day from as far away as 40 miles, Russian air force Sukhoi fighter-bombers systematically demolish Ukrainian defenses, easing the way for Russian army assault groups to advance, albeit still at great cost.

KABs are a major reason the Ukrainian garrison in the eastern city Avdiivka ultimately retreated last month following a brutal, four-month battle."


So there it is in black and white, gramps.

Please stop wasting my time.

Link to Article:

@hog88 Doesn't Know How to Read

Yep, I was right.
 
Putin has a history of killing Russians in order to satisfy his political aims.

They do have actual terrorists, too.

Awful situation.

Maybe Tucker can show us another Moscow supermarket next week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
They do have actual terrorists, too.

Awful situation.

Maybe Tucker can show us another Moscow supermarket next week.

They do, though I find it highly unlikely that 4 rando terrorists can sneak into the city with military-grade rifles, murder a bunch of people, burn down a concert hall, and all escape before Spetsnaz counter terrorism units can even roll out or bed, in a city where holding up a blank piece of paper will get you arrested almost instantaneously.
 
They do, though I find it highly unlikely that 4 rando terrorists can sneak into the city with military-grade rifles, murder a bunch of people, burn down a concert hall, and all escape before Spetsnaz counter terrorism units can even roll out or bed, in a city where holding up a blank piece of paper will get you arrested almost instantaneously.
The only thing I know for sure is that some of the witness reports and many of the real-time hot takes will turn out to be wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
Clandestine
@WarClandestine

There are three possibilities here:

1- US/NATO/Ukraine were behind the attack, in an attempt to force Putin to escalate, and drag NATO into full-scale WW3.

2- Russia were behind the attack to justify significant escalation.

3- Unknown entity carried out for unknown reasons.

Option 1 seems like the most plausible, because the West are the only ones who could possibly benefit from this situation. Putin already has all the support he needs to do whatever the hell he wants, he does not need to kill his own civilians to justify a war he is already in, fresh off an election where he got 88% of the vote.

Deep State actors are the ones who are desperate to start a global war. It solves all of their problems. They can cancel the US election, further extend their power, and the war machine keeps getting paid.

Would they start WW3 to stop Trump? Absolutely.

==================

 
Clandestine
@WarClandestine

There are three possibilities here:

1- US/NATO/Ukraine were behind the attack, in an attempt to force Putin to escalate, and drag NATO into full-scale WW3.

2- Russia were behind the attack to justify significant escalation.

3- Unknown entity carried out for unknown reasons.

Option 1 seems like the most plausible, because the West are the only ones who could possibly benefit from this situation. Putin already has all the support he needs to do whatever the hell he wants, he does not need to kill his own civilians to justify a war he is already in, fresh off an election where he got 88% of the vote.

Deep State actors are the ones who are desperate to start a global war. It solves all of their problems. They can cancel the US election, further extend their power, and the war machine keeps getting paid.

Would they start WW3 to stop Trump? Absolutely.

==================



Is this what confirmation bias looks like in real time?
 
Why would a terrorist attack against Russia make it more likely the US or Europe would be drawn in to Ukraine?

Would make much more sense that, if that were the goal, there'd be a terrorist attack in Europe, allegedly tied to Russia.

Sorry, but the US or Europe involvement angle here makes no sense.
 
Ukraine has nothing to gain from such an attack when their strongest card to play is their widespread public support in the West. This attack does nothing militarily but would risk loss of support from western countries which is their only lifeline.
Meanwhile, Putin has every motive to try and shore up his domestic support with his own populace that is growing increasingly weary of the conflict.
As always, one should ask the question “who benefits”?
 
Last edited:
Clandestine
@WarClandestine

There are three possibilities here:

1- US/NATO/Ukraine were behind the attack, in an attempt to force Putin to escalate, and drag NATO into full-scale WW3.

2- Russia were behind the attack to justify significant escalation.

3- Unknown entity carried out for unknown reasons.

Option 1 seems like the most plausible, because the West are the only ones who could possibly benefit from this situation.
This is an inconvenient fact.

 

VN Store



Back
Top