Russia/Ukraine Megathread V6

[Rod1]

Here would be my "fantasy" conditions of Finland joining NATO:

-Bush regime should be prosecuted for starting an illegal war in Iraq
-Neutral investigation into Sarkozy's dealings with Gaddafi, as well as a general investigation of anyone involved with launching the intervention into Libya
-Current actions of the U.S. in Yemen, and Turkey against Kurds should be looked into

We are not in a moral position over Russia until we clear up our own dirt here in the West.



Finland had a bunch of guys working for USSR but they fled when the war broke out (and were massacred by Stalin). I think most of the rats paid by Russia in Ukraine have also left the ship by now.

I would definitely agree that Finland was in a better situation to put up a patriotic defense of the country than Ukraine, but it wasn't as clear-cut as Finland being full of people that loved the country and wanted to die for it. There was a lot of bitterness and tension over the Civil War, the Lapua movement and other things.

It's also down-played, but a harsh truth, that Finnish people had no choice. Either you fought, or you were executed by the government, that was the way of the world back then. Summary executions of Finnish soldiers that refused to fight in almost impossible circumstances, were common. Morale was kept up by madmen such as this:

https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einar_Vihma



I don't care if it's defensive or not. I feel no reason to be in an alliance with war-mongers, because it weakens our moral position. The only alliance that Finland should ever have, are with countries that are not starting wars and killing civilians. I can't exactly have that faith in NATO.

I guess the alternative is going for nukes like Israel

 

[Rod1]

No shit bright boy!
My point is (and it seems you and many others are missing it) that Russia has now learned enough in almost 3 months of fighting to change its tactics on the ground. Don't expect these guys to keep making the same mistake. Russian advance has stalled, but so has the Ukrainian advance. Why are the Ukrainians stalled? Puttin is not putting fresh soldiers into this conflict - not through a mobilization anyway. Ukrainians should be making advances in every front.

* Also, I don't know why you and others in this thread think I'm on Russia's side. I'm not. I like to study the enemy and predict what he might do next.

Ukrainian advance has not stalled, they won Battle of Kiev, they are going to win Battle of Kharhiv, after that they will move to Izium.

Russia is "stalled" because its throwing the house through the window, they are suffering massive losses that they can't replace.

 

[Anewt]

First, I realize that English is a 2nd language, but get a better translator app if you want to insult me - no one knows what milking an ant means.

Second, I'm sorry that country is being wrecked and that your people are dying. I truly mean that and wish it weren't happening, but I'm no Russian troll or paid shill - if I were it would the more than 600 euro.

3rd. Are you suggesting that Russia wants to steal Ukraine's resources? I mean it's a stretch to suggest that they originally wanted anything more that to shore up their naval base on the peninsula.

Lastly. Nothing I said is wrong. The Bucharest Declaration led to Georgia being bombed and Ukeaine would have as well if not for a pro-Russian govt. And we clearly tried to manipulate Ukraine's election after their revolution. And lastly the head of NATO troops was in Ukraine ladt July in "an effort to work more closely together". None of that makes Putin's war ok, but they are facts.

Don't bother mate. He's a bit far gone. Everyone is a paid putin shill or Kremlin supporter if they don't repeat verbatim western media.

 

[PEB]

The guy who posts tons of war stuff works for her.

 

[San Marino]

Ukrainian advance has not stalled, they won Battle of Kiev, they are going to win Battle of Kharhiv, after that they will move to Izium.

'Claimed' Ukrainian counteroffensive:

 

[TheGreatA]

I guess the alternative is going for nukes like Israel

Our old dictator Kekkonen wanted Finland to have nukes. It never came to pass though.

With Russia's "performance" against Ukraine, I'm confident that Finland can defend its borders even without nuclear capacity, though. As I've said many times, I'm a lot less worried about Russia after they've invaded Ukraine, than before they invaded Ukraine. Before, we didn't really know how capable their military truly was. Now we do.

I breathe a lot easier and am a lot less worried about Russia now than I used to be, which is why I feel joining NATO is just hysteria on part of the same people who were in hysterics over COVID. It seems like a knee-jerk reaction on the part of a population that has been living in a manufactured climate of fear and need for the past several years. They cling onto NATO as a solution, without realizing that NATO will bring with it an even greater level of responsibility and duty than ever before, introducing new problems that we aren't accustomed to solving.

Finland is no longer responsible just for itself, but for the world. We can legitimately drag the rest of the world into conflict now if we succumb to our weakness, whereas before it would've been just a small-scale border conflict over some territories that nobody in their right mind should give a damn about.

 

[Cole train]

Our old dictator Kekkonen wanted Finland to have nukes. It never came to pass though.

With Russia's "performance" against Ukraine, I'm confident that Finland can defend its borders even without nuclear capacity, though. As I've said many times, I'm a lot less worried about Russia after they've invaded Ukraine, than before they invaded Ukraine. Before, we didn't really know how capable their military truly was. Now we do.

I breathe a lot easier and am a lot less worried about Russia now than I used to, which is why I feel joining NATO is just hysteria on part of the same people who were in hysterics over COVID. It seems like a knee-jerk reaction on the part of a population that has been living in a manufactured climate of fear and need for the past several years. They cling onto NATO as a solution, without realizing that NATO will bring with it an even greater level of responsibility and duty than ever before.

Finland is no longer responsible just for itself, but for the world. We can legitimately drag the rest of the world into conflict now if we succumb to our weakness.

To be fair ukraine is likely most combat experienced military in europe thanks to donbas conflict.They have more combat vets than we have sent people to peacekeeping mission since ww2

Our military is a question mark

 

[Rational Poster]

It was already going that way by the end, with Hitler purging the likes of Rommel and replacing them with his own goons, such as when he actually gave Himmler command for a while (which turned out to be a disaster). Göring, while a great flying ace in WW1, was also a terrible commander, responsible for many of Luftwaffe's worst losses.

The actual card-carrying Nazis kind of sucked ass at waging war. They were mostly good for massacring and torturing civilians. Hitler ironically probably had the most success of making decisions out of the Nazi lot.

Paranoid, loony dictators tend to go with the people they believe to be loyal. That's why Stalin had horselord Budyonny in charge of the defense of the USSR instead of Tuchachevsky whom he purged. Budyonny, as one would expect of a man that believed horses to be superior to tanks, turned out to be a terrible leader in the WW2 environment, although not quite as terrible as Stalin himself who caused enormous casualties on the part of Soviet troops by pushing for pointless, reckless counter-offensives that led to encirclements and annihilation.

There's an account by Khruschev of him and Budyonny crying their eyes out when Stalin gave an order for a "counter-offensive" which they knew to be utterly doomed and hopeless for the men involved. Yet to save their own lives, they gave that order to the men, and as a result, hundreds of thousands of men were butchered. Men that could've easily held off the Nazi assault for quite some time, in a defensive position.

Well I'm not sure about the Nazis sucking at waging war. Model for example was probably one of the most competent generals of the entire war and was also very much a Nazi. (And a huge prick)

Guderian likewise was definitely a Nazi. Kesselring, von Manstein, and von Kleist were all either definitely Nazis or at least were cool with it.

All of whom I would consider world class generals and a notch above basically every allied commander.

 

[San Marino]

Logistics is one of the most unglamorous jobs in the military. And one of the most essential. It doesn't matter how tough and well trained your soldiers are, or how advanced your equipment. If you can't keep them supplied with fuel, ammo, medical treatment and food, you're going to lose the war.

"Amateurs talk about strategy, professionals talk about logistics."

 

[Rational Poster]

'Claimed' Ukrainian counteroffensive:

This map is a week old. Ukrainians are pushing Russia over the border at Kharkiv.

 

[TheGreatA]

To be fair ukraine is likely most combat experienced military in europe thanks to donbas conflict.They have more combat vets than we have sent people to peacekeeping mission since ww2

Our military is a question mark

It's a question mark but Russia's military potential has been greatly compromised, and will be for the next several decades, as a result of this war. There is no way that they could divide enough resources to stage a meaningful attack into Finland, unless our military is just the complete shits and gives up without even fighting.

Well I'm not sure about the Nazis sucking at waging war. Model for example was probably one of the most competent generals of the entire war and was also very much a Nazi. (And a huge prick)

Guderian likewise was definitely a Nazi. Kesselring, von Manstein, and von Kleist were all either definitely Nazis or at least were cool with it.

All of whom I would consider world class generals and a notch above basically every allied commander.

I was talking mostly about the "card-carrying Nazis" who were part of the political movement. Of course, most German generals were Nazi sympathizers and had deep ties with the government. But they weren't the people responsible for the ideological drivel. They weren't the people who had come up with Hitler in the "trenches", like Göring, Himmler, Goebbels, Röhm, etc. They joined up later when they saw that their "services" as military-men were needed.

I can't really recall anyone that was part of the political movement who had any real success at waging war, apart from some of Hitler's ideas that were effective in the early stages. The ideological SS were mainly just good for killing women and children in camps.

 

[San Marino]

"The War was won with British brains, American steel and Russian blood".

You British love to quote that.
Montgomery was a failure during Operation Market Garden, launched in September 1944.
The Germans thought Patton was the best leader the Allies had.
Plenty of American brains and blood during WWII.
The British were fighting in 1 front, Americans were fighting in 2 fronts (Germany and Japan).

 

[Cole train]

It's a question mark but Russia's military potential has been greatly compromised, and will be for the next several decades, as a result of this war. There is no way that they could divide enough resources to stage a meaningful attack into Finland, unless our military is just the complete shits and gives up without even fighting.



I was talking mostly about the "card-carrying Nazis" who were part of the political movement. Of course, most German generals were Nazi sympathizers and had deep ties with the government. But they weren't the people responsible for the ideological drivel. They weren't the people who had come up with Hitler in the "trenches", like Göring, Himmler, Goebbels, Röhm, etc.

I can't really recall anyone that was part of the movement who had any real success at waging war, apart from some of Hitler's ideas that were effective in the early stages.

Oh yeah attack is not coming unless they announce mobilization.

Our military guys are happy though i hear, finally might get to do something next time nato does something instead of training recruits or sitting at gate in lebanon.

 

[San Marino]

This map is a week old. Ukrainians are pushing Russia over the border at Kharkiv.

Do you have an updated map showing that?

 

[TheGreatA]

Oh yeah attack is not coming unless they announce mobilization.

Our military guys are happy though i hear, finally might get to do something next time nato does something instead of training recruits or sitting at gate in lebanon.

NATO will provide plenty of opportunities for action, that's almost guaranteed.

 

[Cole train]

NATO will provide plenty of opportunities for action, that's almost guaranteed.

Wonder if they will take volunteers....

 

[San Marino]

*

 

[KnightTemplar]

You British love to quote that.
Montgomery was a failure during Operation Market Garden, launched in September 1944.
The Germans thought Patton was the best leader the Allies had.
Plenty of American brains and blood during WWII.
The British were fighting in 1 front, Americans were fighting in 2 fronts (Germany and Japan).

We quote it because it's true. Professional Historians, who have no nationalistic axe to grind, believe that Bletchley Park breaking the Enigma and Lorenz ciphers shortened the War by between two and four years.

The British fought the Japanese in Burma. A distant relative of mine survived a Japanese POW camp. Barely. He was skin and bone when the Japanese surrendered.

 

[Rational Poster]

It's a question mark but Russia's military potential has been greatly compromised, and will be for the next several decades, as a result of this war. There is no way that they could divide enough resources to stage a meaningful attack into Finland, unless our military is just the complete shits and gives up without even fighting.



I was talking mostly about the "card-carrying Nazis" who were part of the political movement. Of course, most German generals were Nazi sympathizers and had deep ties with the government. But they weren't the people responsible for the ideological drivel. They weren't the people who had come up with Hitler in the "trenches", like Göring, Himmler, Goebbels, Röhm, etc.

I can't really recall anyone that was part of the movement who had any real success at waging war, apart from some of Hitler's ideas that were effective in the early stages. The ideological SS were mainly just good for killing women and children in camps.

The guys I listed were definitely card carriers. The only one I would lean more toward just a sympathizer was von Kleist.

They were just lower ranked than guys like Himmler, Goring, etc, but were certainly devoted Nazis or they would not have kept their ranks post assassination plot.

 

[Anewt]

You British love to quote that.
Montgomery was a failure during Operation Market Garden, launched in September 1944.
The Germans thought Patton was the best leader the Allies had.
Plenty of American brains and blood during WWII.
The British were fighting in 1 front, Americans were fighting in 2 fronts (Germany and Japan).

??? ?

Nope. Britain didn't fight on just one front vs Germany..... that's absurd. They were fighting on multiple fronts for years before you yanks even got involved lol.