International Russia/Ukraine Megathread V10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ramon.D said:
@Rational Poster is the most informative writer in this thread.

Still reading from the few who still hold on to Russia is a mystery to me. Brainwashed or not, it should ring bells when you write on an international forum where the majority of us from different parts of the world condemn Russia. A natural reaction should awaken self-awareness in one.

In these tough economic times, my greatest wish had been that every civilized nation should be more self-sufficient. An incident or armed conflict should not paralyze the rest of the world and make life super difficult for the most marginalized in our society. A developed country must always be able to offer its citizens reasonable prices for clean water, heat and electricity.

What will happen after Putin? For a very long time to come, Russia wants to have the worst reputation that no one wants to have a relationship with. It is sad for all Russians who may have something to say but do not dare to open their mouths and remain in the country because they do not have the opportunity to escape Putin's long arm.

We live in a Global world and it is fantastic. But at the same time, we have men like Putin or a country like China who destroy the whole harmony for the rest of us who want to keep the global machinery going. Therefore, the most anti-American and anti-NATO person should ask himself whether the world would have looked better if the most militarily equipped and combat-experienced country had been Russia or China.

I am grateful that we have the United States holding the baton on the world stage.

I want to thank @Rational Poster for me finding this site.



Unfortunately, I don't remember who suggested Stephen Kotkin, but thanks anyway.

Click to expand...


Yeah that channel is really good for understanding the scale of US capability compared to others. US is in the major leagues of warfare, everyone else is just pretending to keep up, but they're really playing little league still. US allies have all pretty much accepted this and have gone the path of extremely specialized units to augment US capability.

France probably being the only exception which has a much more balanced and capable military. A lot of attention has been given to America's interventions, while France has quietly established control over much of sub-Saharan west Africa quite successfully. Even the Libya intervention which a lot of people like to hang around Obama's neck was a major interest to the French who lead the call for a no-fly zone and launched the first strikes against the Gaddafi regime. It was in their backyard after all. Much of the continued aid and assistance to Libya comes from France today.

Appreciate the compliment, I've been interested in military history as long as I can remember so I approach this conflict from that perspective and try not to be so partisan about even though it's abundantly clear despite all of America's mistakes and mishaps over the years, American hegemony is infinitely more preferred to any available alternatives. This isn't even that partisan, it's supported by data too. Just look at the GDP per capita of Latvia and Estonia compared to Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. The benefits to the American global system is glaring. There's a lot of bullshit from both sides to cut through to get to the real truth in terms of military history. I'm not an expert and it's mostly just my opinion, so keep that in mind.

My current opinion is that things might start moving between April and May.. and the strength of western arms will have a much larger impact than people seem to be anticipating. This is an artillery fight and the winner of the artillery fight is the side that has better ISR (intelligence,surveilance,recon). Ukraine will have a huge edge there from vehicles equipped with western optics and targeting computers, as well as continued support from aerial radar, satellite imagery, etc.

Swedish Archers, US HIMARs now with GLSDBs, JDAMs even in small quantity will have a huge impact in this sort of fight when concentrated where it's appropriate. The number of guns and missiles isn't as important as actually hitting things that actually have tactical or strategic impact.
 
Last edited:
US should had supplied Ukr ATACMS missiles...long ago...
Biden always since summer had repeatedly refused....
Last time was when this Zelensky was in U.S.
Pentagon and Biden openly refused to supply ATACMS missiles and dreamer had been told that sooner or later he will talk with Putin .....

So all is clear here...
Real U.S opinion about this question.
Germany too again repeatedly is pushing approx the same stuff.

Supplies are done in order to keep Ukr alive but in no case to win war....
 
RemyR said:
I mean, neither could Russia (Soviet Union)
Click to expand...

To be fair we killed roughly 55,000 of the 75,000 Taliban in the country.. the rest hid in caves or fled to Pakistan till we had enough.

US suffered only 1,900 casualties to enemy activity in Afghanistan over 20 years.

We'll never know the truth of the Soviet loses, but estimates are 15K dead and over 50,000 wounded in less than 10 years.
 
RemyR said:
I mean, neither could Russia (Soviet Union)
Click to expand...

russia (soviets) were facing all of afghanistan with support of entire muslim world and the west and still left with a peace treaty that left the socialist government in power. that treaty was of course violated once they left

us was facing taliban only (100k members at best) with no major backing and the puppet government they installed collapsed even before they fled afghanistan leaving behind their citizens and tonnes of military equipment
 
MeatheadMike said:
So if the reason Russia invaded was because Ukraine was talking about joining NATO... then all that talk about denazifying Ukraine was complete horseshit, right?
Click to expand...

one doesn't exclude the other.

its not like there has to be only one reason. there can be many different ones that trigger a reaction.

in this case it was nato + violation of minsk agreement and shelling of rebel held positions in east ukraine
 
lsa said:
In 2014 Russia simulated a (nuclear) attack on Stockholm.
Having "nukes pointed" at them is nothing new here..
Russia have been violating the Nordics air and sea space for years never given a fuck.

LOL at getting them self involved.. Russias bullying mentality have forced them too.
Click to expand...

and now they get themselves directly involved in a potential conflict between russia and nato...

its like justifying being nazi collaborator in ww2 cause "communism"
 
grimballer said:
and now they get themselves directly involved in a potential conflict between russia and nato...

its like justifying being nazi collaborator in ww2 cause "communism"
Click to expand...

So nothing changes really.
Except Russia will think twice before attacking. This is a good thing.


LOL not even close...
 
Russians take equipment out of Mariupol due to logistical problems

"Quote: "Why is the enemy keeping a group of troops on the Zaporizhzhia front and not attacking? Let me explain: if the enemy extends its offensive along the entire contact line, it will start to lack logistics. The enemy already lacks logistics on the four main fronts where it is attacking. If the Zaporizhzhia front is also included, the enemy will not be able to supply ammunition or fuel at all.

The problem with this is already tangible, as today we received information that the enemy, after numerous attacks [by the Ukrainian Armed Forces – ed.] on ammunition and fuel storage points in Mariupol, has begun to take equipment and ammunition out of Mariupol...

This will complicate logistical supplies of ammunition and fuel, as well as equipment repair."

Russians take equipment out of Mariupol due to logistical problems (msn.com)

Looks like when Wagner troops were begging for ammo, it wasn't just a one-off. This is a wide logistical failure on Russia's part.
 
lsa said:
So nothing changes really.
Except Russia will think twice before attacking. This is a good thing.

LOL not even close...
Click to expand...

nothing changes except theres potential of ww3 happening and nato expansion is the main reason why
 
grimballer said:
nothing changes except theres potential of ww3 happening and nato expansion is the main reason why
Click to expand...

No, no its not.
Sweden and Finland have been outside NATO since the beginning.
They applied to NATO now, what changede? Russia...
IF WWIII happens its because of Russia and its agression.
Russia is the one who invaded Ukraine, Russia is one threatening with nukes, Russia is the one threatening other countries.

But lets blame it on NATO and the evil Nazis in Ukraine.......
 
lsa said:
No, no its not.
Sweden and Finland have been outside NATO since the beginning.
They applied to NATO now, what changede? Russia...
IF WWIII happens its because of Russia and its agression.
Russia is the one who invaded Ukraine, Russia is one threatening with nukes, Russia is the one threatening other countries.

But lets blame it on NATO and the evil Nazis in Ukraine.......
Click to expand...
It's a bit telling that his retort to Finland joining NATO is along the lines of "well now they're gonna get nuked!" while simultaneously being unable to articulate a single reason why the existence of NATO is somehow cause to threaten nuclear war
He's just flailing around and biting himself on the ass like a mangy dog
 
grimballer said:
nothing changes except theres potential of ww3 happening and nato expansion is the main reason why
Click to expand...
lol no numbnuts, Putin invading a sovereign country because he wanted to recreate the glory days of the Russian Empire before he leaves office is the reason NATO is growing. It's not 'expanding', countries are flocking to join for protection against an aggressive war-mongering Russia that does not respect diplomatic freedom or national sovereignty. If Russia had not invaded Ukraine, neither Finland or Sweden would be joining NATO. Self-inflicted injuries from Russia.

NATO does not expand because it is a voluntary organisation. It can grow because the threat that they defend against become more threatening. But who's fault is that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,275,123
Messages
57,969,366
Members
175,884
Latest member
cloudfair

Share this page

Back
Top