Russia/Ukraine Megathread V5

[Da Speeit]

The guy is obviously very well informed and smart, plus he's keeping it polite all the way while 10 people here are posting nothing but shit to him. This whole thing will be over, sooner or later, and anyone can come back to this thread to check if he was right about things. I'd say he's on spot on almost everything I've read from him so far.

I did say this would only last a couple of days and totally underestimate how long Zelensky and the West planned to draw this out.
It should have been over weeks ago

 

[jimbob27]

How many assets has he used to take Kiev? Next to none. The plan seems to be (idk if you saw that Newseek article I posted a few pages back), to encircle Kiev and slowly squeeze to push forward negotiations.
They're not remotely at the breaking point btw.

This is what's driving me crazy (not you), but whenever you ask why he wants Kiev, people respond with the same narrative that is proven to be more and more false by the day. He doesn't want to topple Ukraine's government, he hasn't asked for anything of the Western region and he hasn't indicated he wants Zelensky to relieve his duty. Installing a pro-Russia regime would be a nightmare. It would be 2014 x 100. That makes zero sense. He clearly wants to encircle Kiev, clamp down, and force a written concession of Crimea and some of the east, as well as making Zelensky go back on his campaign manifesto, which would make Zelensky look horrible to his voting base (in Putin's eyes)

I think this is a pretty good assessment. He clearly wants Mariupol as well to have a land bridge to Crimea. He's holocausting and concentration camping the citizens there, because... well... that's how Russians became the majority in Crimea, he's repeating history in that regard.

 

[Da Speeit]

I think this is a pretty good assessment. He clearly wants Mariupol as well to have a land bridge to Crimea. He's holocausting and concentration camping the citizens there, because... well... that's how Russians became the majority in Crimea, he's repeating history in that regard.

is he though?
Not saying i would put it past him, but those are serious claims that get thrown around all the time.

 

[jimbob27]

Not a believable number.
DM does reference the bullshit NYT article as well tho. Another W for me

You had a Wank over that?

 

[Anewt]

Apparently a pro-Kremlin website posted the number 9861 dead before quickly taking it down again.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...our-weeks-toll-Ukraine-invasion-revealed.html

Not even a screenshot? Reaaaalllly? A pro-Russian website... a pro Ukranian employee.. so... that makes it more likely to be true ? Lol come on and why would the Kremlin be giving any website/ news the accurate figures.. think about it.

" well look ... Here's the accurate military numbers that nobody knows... but here's the numbers I want you too run " reeeeaaaallllyyy?

But sure the mysterious pro Ukranian employee is somehow telling the truth lol.

Come on

 

[A Lurker]

I completely disagree. They've literally almost got their stated objectives.

At what unnecessary cost, even if I grant your second sentence, which I think is far from the truth.

 

[det_regnar_på_vår_kärlek]

Can you honestly just clearly state your opinion of the entire conflict and cover the following topics?:

- are you pro-Putin?
- are you pro-Russian oligarch elite?
- are you anti or pro NATO?
- do you believe NATO inherently threatens Russia? If so, how and provide evidence.
- does NATO or Ukraine pose an existential threat to Russia? If so, how and provide evidence.
- do you think former Soviet vassal states that willingly left the USSR are rightful possessions of Russia? Does Russia need to resubjugate these nations to defend Russians?
- do you support fascist, autocratic regimes or do you believe in things like freedom of speech, mostly unfettered capitalism..etc.?
- do you believe autocracy is a superior way of life for all over a more liberal system like democracy that embraces free enterprise?
- do you believe Putin and Russia was backed into a cordner by NATO expansion and had no choice but to invade Ukraine?
- do you believe there was no path forward for Russia around 1999-2000 other than delving back into autocracy or do you think Russia could have embraced Europe and Western economics?

I think if you could honestly expand on the following, it would be helpful for everyone in here. Otherwise, you just seem busy on trying to play foolish logic games and 'gotch-ism' posting. You're wasting people's time offering hardly any real substantive opinion and frankly, you're going to continue getting mocked, derided and called out - if you don't like that, then just be clear.

Your post demonstrates why it's so difficult to have a rational conversation about the war. People are so engulfed by propaganda that everything is reduced to binaries. No nuance is allowed. You're either pro-West, democracy, human rights and freedom or you're a Putler apologist. I think this is why people in the West have so much trouble trying to understand the position other countries are taking. Most countries don't see this conflict as a battle of good against evil. Some choose to be non aligned. China, for instance, which is often accused of tacit support to Russia, to this day hasn't recognized Russia's annexation of Crimea. A lot of countries unequivocally condemn Russia's invasion, but they don't think it happened in a vacuum, so they're not willing to pick up part of the tab and join economic sanctions against Russia.

 

[A Lurker]

The guy is obviously very well informed and smart, plus he's keeping it polite all the way while 10 people here are posting nothing but shit to him. This whole thing will be over, sooner or later, and anyone can come back to this thread to check if he was right about things. I'd say he's on spot on almost everything I've read from him so far.

Polite is fucking stretch

 

[mkess101]

I completely disagree. They've literally almost got their stated objectives.

His point was more that if their stated objectives were truly the only goal, they could have been achieved FAR more easily with way less loss of life and equipment. Again, this is some former general military strategist talking. I will listen to him because like I said he knows a hell of a lot more than I do about this stuff. I would imagine there's someone with a valid counterargument but logically what he says sure makes sense to me.

 

[Anewt]

At what unnecessary cost, even if I grant your second sentence, which I think is far from the truth.

Considering how dug in the military line in donbas was

( trenches bunkers etc ) far less than just trying to take donbas from the east.

 

[Da Speeit]

You had a Wank over that?

Saving it for later

 

[A Lurker]

Not a believable number

based upon what? We are nearly a month in and the russian forces have achieved what exactly? If they have not been taking a sizeable loss why is this not over?

 

[Da Speeit]

Polite is fucking stretch

Mate, i haven’t done or said even a quarter of what’s been thrown my way and i hold no ill will toward any one doing it and approach all of you in good faith. I’m a snide prick, sure, but sometimes it seems like some of you want an excuse to lash out at someone and you find someone (me in this case) with the wrong opinion and use it as an avenue to act downright insane at times.

 

[Da Speeit]

based upon what? We are nearly a month in and the russian forces have achieved what exactly? If they have not been taking a sizeable loss why is this not over?

You think 10k is a believable number?

 

[bad mojo]

Polite is fucking stretch

With the amount of garbage thrown at him, he should get a pass for much worse. But at least this whole debate is keeping the thread alive. It always gets like this when there's no big news coming.

 

[jimbob27]

Saving it for later

I think that number is within the realms of possibility. Just based on the fact this website seems to have verified 827 russian vehicles destroyed.

I dunno what the ratio of troop to vehicle losses is in modern warfare, but 10:1 seems plausible to me.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

 

[A Lurker]

Considering how dug in the military line in donbas was

( trenches bunkers etc ) far less than just trying to take donbas from the east.

It’s been nearly a month and what have they achieved?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

It was far more of a coup than Jan 6.

And I always read about that being a attempted coup and insurgency...

The people storming the Capitol didn't make it a coup. It was all the national and state elected officials that plotted to have the election overturned that made it a soft coup. You can call the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys factions rebels but it remains to be seen just how deep their involvement in the planning of the coup was.

 

[Da Speeit]

I think that number is within the realms of possibility. Just based on the fact this website seems to have verified 827 russian vehicles destroyed.

I dunno what the ratio of troop to vehicle losses is in modern warfare, but 10:1 seems plausible to me.

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html

I don’t believe that at all, sorry. Not every vehicle is manned, many are stuck, abandoned and demolished. When we start getting into the tens of thousands, you’re looking at massive numbers groundfighting and close quarters combat. There has been a minimal amount of that thus far.

not buying that number. Just reeks

 

[A Lurker]

Mate, i haven’t done or said even a quarter of what’s been thrown my way and i hold no ill will toward any one doing it and approach all of you in good faith. I’m a snide prick, sure, but sometimes it seems like some of you want an excuse to lash out at someone and you find someone (me in this case) with the wrong opinion and use it as an avenue to act downright insane at times.

Im warming on you, you have a rather odd view on all this IMHO, but you have made me laugh a few times. In this day and age that’s a positive.