War in Ukraine

[LSU-SIU]

But this is a disastrous situation for Russia now.

Yeah, is was disastrous for the Taliban as well. Thanks David.

 

[Septic]

Yeah, is was disastrous for the Taliban as well. Thanks David.

Are you trying to defeat your own argument or do you not get the irony of using an militarily outmatched but HIGHLY motivated group fighting in their own backyards as an example of why Russia is failing?

 

[apevol]

Are you trying to defeat your own argument or do you not get the irony of using an militarily outmatched but HIGHLY motivated group fighting in their own backyards as an example of why Russia is failing?

No, he genuinely thinks the Russian federation is fighting against NATO and doesn't understand that there has been a small but very determined number of ukrainians who have been waiting for Russia to attack them when they're actually ready for it for generations.

 

[LouderVol]

That is why there isn't suppose to be a large military force there, if they are there.... they could be subject to tactical nukes. Send NATO in, they will probably get nuked in the Ukraine by the time they get deployed in mass.

NATO countries wouldn't get nuked, the Ukraine would.



LoL. I am not appealing to anyone, not even sure what that even means. Simply put, the Russians figured out the only way to defend themselves against NATO with 1/20th of the budget is use tactical nuclear weapons as the try and attack. I'm not sure why you are upset. Its not my strategy, its theirs. Either way, there is no real counter other than what the U.S. was doing i.e. creep.

Russia has the biggest tactical nuclear capability in the world, and for a reason... you (Russians) can't match a $1-2t annual military budget. Tactical weapons were really the only solution.



The Congressional Record is just to show you this is no real secret... it was even televised on CSPAN. LoL

Basically, you are upset at the reason... but the reason is going to be the same tomorrow as well.

I am upset they cant apply logic, and neither can you.

NATO deploys troops in Estonia. It's fine. NATO deploys troops in Latvia. It's fine.
NATO deploys troops in Finland. It's fine.
NATO deploys troops in Ukraine. Time to break out the nukes.

There is no logic there. I dont care if they have been saying it for 3000 years, it's not logical.

And if NATO deploys troops in Ukraine. Russia nukes them in Ukraine. Do you think NATO just sits by? Says "that's enough war" and call it day? Or do they also deploy their more limited number of tactical nukes in a tit for tat exchange. How does that end? NATO runs out first and then calls it quits? Or do they go strategic?

Even if they are "tactical" weapons it's still mutually assured destruction. Which is why there is no logic. Which is why it's a crap argument.

 

[Burhead]

 

[Burhead]

 

[LouderVol]

Ukraine will win the war | The Spectator
David Petraeus
On the war’s momentum: It has fundamentally shifted, and I'm normally fairly guarded and cautious about this, but the tide clearly has turned because the success of this offensive, as important as it is itself on the ground, is that it reflects a hugely important development: Ukraine has been incomparably better than Russia in recruiting, training, equipping, organising and employing additional forces. Russia has been struggling to do just that, literally running out of soldiers, ammunition tanks, fighting vehicles and so forth. Ukraine is supported superbly by the US and Nato, whereas Russia, even if it declared mobilisation today, could not reverse this fundamental reality. So the implications are stark. They're very, very clear. Ukraine will over time experience tough fighting, more casualties, more punishing Russian strikes on civilian infrastructure. But Ukraine will over time, I think, retake the territory that Russia has seized since 24 February. And it's even conceivable now that they could retake Crimea and the Donbas. And oh, by the way, with what's going on in the front lines, there is insurgent activity now picking up in the Russian rear areas carried out by Ukrainians there as well. So again, this is going to take time. There will be tough fighting, all of that. But this is a disastrous situation for Russia now.

This isnt over by a long shot. Just like I said before when Russia was in control. The momentum can change. Any number of things could change the direction of this war. One offensive, or two, isnt going to determine this war.

 

[825VOL]

Not once the United States got involved.



There is no realistic move for that to happen.



This. Most of what is going on is insignificant details. The real war is economic war with Europe.

We have been involved in just about everything since WWII ended. You say there is no realistic way Russia loses. I think they have already lost no matter the outcome of this "special operation". The Russian military has been shown to be inept, woefully untrained, and extremely top heavy. Regardless of the outcome of this, they will not be feared as they once were.

An economic war, as you state, will definitely hurt Europe more than Russia. Outside of the super rich in Russia, most people are very poor. They are used to hardships where as Europeans are not. If Europe wants to play the long game, they need to go back to nuclear and other fossil fuels that they can acquire from countries not named Russia. That would take some time but in the end it would rid themselves of their dependency on Russia. Removing that dependency is vital for them.

Russia and some other countries do not value human life like we in the West do. They will throw troops at the problem which will only mean more dead on both sides. Putin has no choice but to continue as a defeat in Ukraine assuredly means his downfall. Ukraine has no choice but to fight unless they want to live under the thumb of Russia. One side will win and one will lose. The outcome is yet to be determined on the ground. I think we will know a lot more by December which way this is headed. Can Russia maintain supplies ( arms and winter gear) for their soldiers? I know Ukraine will be well supplied by the West. Can Russia stop the Ukrainian advances or even mount one of their own with poorly trained conscripts? Will this spill over into other countries and expand globally? There are still a lot of questions to be answered and only time will tell.

 

[MontyPython]

Somebody done lost their friggin mind...

Putin 'Going All In' to Turn Ukraine War Into Conflict With NATO, Ally Says

The Russian government's Tass news agency reported on Tuesday that the LPR has set a "referendum on joining Russia" for September 23 to 27. Denis Pushilin, head of the DPR, has said a referendum will be scheduled on the same dates. The two pro-Russia separatist republics broke away from Kyiv in 2014 following Putin's annexation of Crimea and were partially occupied by Russia that year.

In her Facebook post, Simonyan suggested that recognizing the eastern regions as belonging to Russia would allow Moscow to more easily threaten NATO with retaliatory strikes for any Ukrainian counterattacks.

"An immediate referendum—it is a Crimean scenario, and it's all-in," wrote Simonyan, referring to the annexation of Crimea following a referendum that had been criticized by U.S. and EU officials as illegitimate.

"Today a referendum, tomorrow—recognition as part of the Russian Federation, the day after tomorrow—strikes on the territory of Russia will become a full-fledged war between Ukraine and NATO with Russia, untying Russia's hands in all respects," she wrote.

Simonyan added: "If I understand correctly, now referendums will be demanded not only in the LPR."

 

[MontyPython]

Oh, I forgot that you have a masters in economics.

You might want to ask for a refund.

 

[LSU-SIU]

I am upset they cant apply logic, and neither can you.

NATO deploys troops in Estonia. It's fine. NATO deploys troops in Latvia. It's fine.
NATO deploys troops in Finland. It's fine.
NATO deploys troops in Ukraine. Time to break out the nukes.

There is no logic there. I dont care if they have been saying it for 3000 years, it's not logical.

And if NATO deploys troops in Ukraine. Russia nukes them in Ukraine. Do you think NATO just sits by? Says "that's enough war" and call it day? Or do they also deploy their more limited number of tactical nukes in a tit for tat exchange. How does that end? NATO runs out first and then calls it quits? Or do they go strategic?

Even if they are "tactical" weapons it's still mutually assured destruction. Which is why there is no logic. Which is why it's a crap argument.

Most of this has been in place for over 30 years. Its logical as Russia doesn't have to spend the money, proof is in the pudding. Most of those countries were not in NATO or are not currently a member of NATO i.e. Finland. Also, even in today's world it greatly reduces the area from which an invasion can take place from because of geography. They're basically down to shipping which would take a year or more to assemble without the Ukraine, see Europe map.

Even if they are "tactical" weapons it's still mutually assured destruction.

No its not. LoL Russia tactical nukes forces in the Ukraine, if enemy nukes Russia land than its onto ICBMs. Russia wouldn't be nuking the NATO they would be nuking the Ukraine.

What I am telling you is exactly what the U.S. military was telling Congress in the 90s.

The Russians are not asking for your approval. LoL

Do you think NATO just sits by? Says "that's enough war" and call it day?

Everything they could have done has been done. They don't care if the Ukrainians all die anyway, nobody is going to be shedding tears. What else you think they are going to do? They just get more busy arming Taiwan so they can get that country blown up as well.

 

[LSU-SIU]

We have been involved in just about everything since WWII ended. You say there is no realistic way Russia loses. I think they have already lost no matter the outcome of this "special operation". The Russian military has been shown to be inept, woefully untrained, and extremely top heavy. Regardless of the outcome of this, they will not be feared as they once were.

Which is why they are bombing the Ukraine, they can't afford to allow further buildup. Its now or never and if its never they really don't have much of a defense going forward.

Agree with you on many points, disagree on a few.

Will this spill over into other countries and expand globally? There are still a lot of questions to be answered and only time will tell.

With the current path, unless something changes... the last thing Europe is going to be worried about is the Ukraine in a year. LoL I agree we will have to see how the economic war pans out, too many variables.

This is all heading in a bad direction for the world, the world could never put out the number of fires the United States is causing.

 

[Vol737]

Wouldn't surprise me. Serbia and Kosovo squaring off, Armenia and Azerbaijan, Russia v Ukraine/NATO influence, Tajikistan v Kyrgzstan, Syria, etc.. Tinder Box has been lit and simmering for a while now.

 

[LouderVol]

Most of this has been in place for over 30 years. Its logical as Russia doesn't have to spend the money, proof is in the pudding. Most of those countries were not in NATO or are not currently a member of NATO i.e. Finland. Also, even in today's world it greatly reduces the area from which an invasion can take place from because of geography. They're basically down to shipping which would take a year or more to assemble without the Ukraine, see Europe map.



No its not. LoL Russia tactical nukes forces in the Ukraine, if enemy nukes Russia land than its onto ICBMs. Russia wouldn't be nuking the NATO they would be nuking the Ukraine.

What I am telling you is exactly what the U.S. military was telling Congress in the 90s.

The Russians are not asking for your approval. LoL



Everything they could have done has been done. They don't care if the Ukrainians all die anyway, nobody is going to be shedding tears. What else you think they are going to do? They just get more busy arming Taiwan so they can get that country blown up as well.

Where did I call for the Russians to/should get my approval? I pointed out it isnt logical.

If Russia is nuking Ukraine, Russias troops arent in Ukraine. If Russia nukes NATO forces in Ukraine, NATO will respond and nuke Russian forces, no matter where they are.

It strange, it's only when outside forces threaten Ukraine or Taiwan that NATO starts arming them and dropping crap tons of money on them. It's almost like if the world was peaceful we wouldnt need NATO.

 

[Velo Vol]

We will not.

 

[MontyPython]

Where are you getting this 12% debt servicing?

 

[MontyPython]

12% wouldnt be bad if we were actually in the black, and if that 12% was paying off the principal. Considering we have a deficit, of what at least 33%, that 12% matters a lot. Because that interest payment just keeps growing, and really doesnt help that interest rates are going up.

What percentage is ok for you? 20%, 25%? Because we are going to get there FAST.

Our debt % is less than it was 80 years ago.

Yet here we are. Leaders of the free world and richest country anywhere.

Don't let the morons here get to you.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Where did I call for the Russians to/should get my approval? I pointed out it isnt logical.

Its a general attitude, when you say things don't make sense (not logical) when Congress and U.S. military say the same thing. The U.S. military has said there is no winning a battle there.

If Russia is nuking Ukraine, Russias troops arent in Ukraine. If Russia nukes NATO forces in Ukraine, NATO will respond and nuke Russian forces, no matter where they are.
.

No they won't which is why you won't see NATO troops there in mass and they tried the creep with the Ukraine. You (nato) ain't suppose to be in the Ukraine, if you go there... they will nuke it as that is their defense. If you (NATO) show up in mass on their shores, they will use tactical nukes.

Its not complex, its very simple... 1.) they will not be invaded 2.) ukraine is the landing spot if nato troops use that area 3.) if you (nato) try and invade any other way, tactical nukes

Not sure what there is to understand, if the United States was being invaded by a superior and outnumbered force... I would hope they would use tactical nukes as well.

Yes, they will use tactical nukes if the need arises, their whole defense is built on it. See Congressional Record. They are not going to go through WW2 again with what the Germans did i.e. invasion. What exactly do you think the world's largest tactical nuclear force is for?

(iii) with the number of deployed strategic warheads in the Russian and United States arsenals likely to be reduced to around 2,250 warheads under a START III accord, Russia's vast
superiority in tactical nuclear warheads becomes a strategic concern;

(v) statements from Russian officials that NATO enlargement would force Russia to rely more heavily on its nuclear arsenal have caused concern that NATO expansion could be an impediment to progress on tactical nuclear arms control; and,

There never was a treaty as far as tactical nuclear weapons and for good reason.

 

[IluvdoubleD's]

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

That's not the same as Russia unifying their motherland. Difference and distinction.

Either it's NATO or rescuing the oppressed people of the Donbass or the de-Nazification of Ukraine.

Pick a lane. We're all exhausted by the whack-a-mole excuses and canned responses you and the other pootin nuthuggers peddle.

Of course you don't see the similarities... hypocrites usually don't.

 

[Septic]

Of course you don't see the similarities... hypocrites usually don't.

Everyone is tired of your whack-a-mole excuse list Ras. You're like a broken record that's stuck on a song everyone thinks sucks. None of your arguments are cogent or rational to anyone with a IQ above room temperature. None.

We get that your motherland is getting embarrassed on the world stage and that this highly distressing for you. People might even cut you a little slack if you'd stop saying fantastical things like "ThIZ is THeir LAs7 ChanC3!" after getting crushed again and again.

Just a little perspective. Take a timeout. Russia prepared for MONTHS on the border of Ukraine and seven months later they're having to recruit street bums and prisoners to go fight and EVEN THEY are refusing.

Ignorance can be tolerated, stupidity can't. You need to back away from this thread and try and get some perspective on how profoundly wrong you are about Russia and the thugs they have running the worlds largest trailer park.

 

[LSU-SIU]

Of course you don't see the similarities... hypocrites usually don't.

"This is for people with < 87 IQ"

He's right over the target but most of the world doesn't even give a crap though. Its the media in the United States/Europe i.e. stupid white areas that might soak some of this nonsense up but let's be honest.... not many people really give a crap about the Ukraine, hell the United States is leaving the whole Euro Zone out to dry.

 

[evillawyer]

Hey @Rasputin_Vol, were these discussed in your propaganda grocery store video?

 

[MG1968]

Everyone is tired of your whack-a-mole excuse list Ras. You're like a broken record that's stuck on a song everyone thinks sucks. None of your arguments are cogent or rational to anyone with a IQ above room temperature. None.

We get that your motherland is getting embarrassed on the world stage and that this highly distressing for you. People might even cut you a little slack if you'd stop saying fantastical things like "ThIZ is THeir LAs7 ChanC3!" after getting crushed again and again.

Just a little perspective. Take a timeout. Russia prepared for MONTHS on the border of Ukraine and seven months later they're having to recruit street bums and prisoners to go fight and EVEN THEY are refusing.

Ignorance can be tolerated, stupidity can't. You need to back away from this thread and try and get some perspective on how profoundly wrong you are about Russia and the thugs they have running the worlds largest trailer park.

Not to mention seeking battlefield help from North Korea.

 

[evillawyer]

What I imagine it was like for @Rasputin_Vol during the recent Ukrainian wins.