All the Russian MoD does is lie. Basing your theory on obvious lies (difficult to shoot people while you’re running away) is naive. And total war works both ways.
This is a reasonable and balanced analysis which I mostly support. Luring or coercing Russia into a full war escalation will come at the price of Putin the evil dictator but what are the alternatives given that most of the propaganda in the west portrays him as that anyway. Very difficult situation for Russia. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Give that the encroachment and provocation are existential threats to Russia, there is really only one choice, escalate and flatten the Ukraine. Yes that makes Putin the monster....
Balanced? Keep on believing this skewed nonsense! Ukraine shall destroy Russia and it is doing so as we speak! Balance? This war is the beginning of the disintegration of Russian FEDERATION.
The disintegration of the russians is squarely upon the russians' own shoulders. Unfortunately, the russian mind is unable to accept culpability when they are at fault, so they must seek a scapegoat in order to save face.
"Russian Expansionism"? You forget we are in the 21st Century? Russia would now be disintegrated, when the Chechens, Buryiats, Tvers, etc, etc return from the war and start seeking their own self determination!
But at the end of the day, Russia defended Kherson, which was important, at the expense of Kharkov, which wasn't.
What did Ukraine actually gain from its ruse d'guerre besides a face saving victory to justify more U.S. bailout, as pointed out?
Was there any strategic or tactical advantage?
Seems Russian intelligence knew there was going to be a serious attack somewhere and stripped Kharkov to meet it so they haven't been entirely in the dark about NATO supply.
Russian intelligence was also busy with terrorist attacks in the south which would also indicate an impending attack there, that "resistance" business: and Darya Dugin.
IDK I don't see how this really changes much of anything except how its perceived, which is important, of course.
But it's also a cheap shot that can easily backfire on its perpetrators since a ruse works only with a bit of luck, which one must never count on.
Had the Russians figured it out in time, the Kharkov salient could have beome ducks in a barrel.
Bet, they'll be more wary.
As for Putin, who knows? He has a lot of angles to cover.
Ukraine regained a huge swathe of territory and severed a critical russian resupply artery for the whole of Donbas.
There were both strategic and tactical advantages that were achieved by the Ukrainians. Additionally, the fleeing rooskies left behind huge piles of still-usable armored vehicles and ammunition. The evidence is not of an orderly repositioning, but a fleeing army low on morale.
Pootie very much wanted this war. Pootie's main problem is that only about 3 of russia's immediate neighbors or former Soviet republics has been willing to bow before Moscow. Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, China, the U.S., Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan have forged their own paths, and in many cases, have told russia to go f**k itself.
Kharkov isn't en route to Kherson and you haven't listed any of these strategic or tactical advantages.
I can't either.
IT was a cynical show boat, IMO, for more money.
Yes, the Russians retreated. But fact remians, that Ukies can advance only where Russians aren't, not the other way around, which is how you win a war.
It was a clever ruse. I 'll give it that. But that's war. You always guess whether intellignce is as it appears or what the enemy wants to you to think.
Many of those countries you listed are either aligned with Russia or never were, unless you're going back to FDR and Stalin.
Multipolarity means countries look out for their own best interest rather than follow U.S. blindly.
Of course, they won't do whatever Russia wants but, more imporant, is that they won't do whatever America wants either.
"self determination of all nations" I think Woodrow Wilosn siad,,,
"strategic or tactical advantages"? What do you call 25,000 trapped Russian troops on the West side of the Dnipro River without resupply and constantly and slowly whittled by Ukrainian Forces?? They are out of the war, either surrender, starvation and freezing, or destruction!
And the other 10 BTGs on those defensive positions on the East side of the river?
Russia is now reacting to Ukraine's initiatives and that is the first sign that Russia is FUCKED!
I'm saying that it is *now* obvious how badly the russian armed forces had rotted from within. Originally, there was a presumption among most if not all of us that, yes, the russian military was an unstoppable behemoth. It turns out that russia has the second most powerful military,... in Ukraine.
And now we are seeing that russia has indeed been collapsing since their illegal war began.
Sweetie, it's not "ruses and threats" when both the russians and the documented evidence on the ground are in agreement that russian forces have been routed, LOL!
Yeah, and China is also on the verge of collapse, SPort.
Bassr Assad is still winning his war, Qasm Soleimani was plotting evil deads, the Taliban is our friend and can be rusted, jus tlike Pakistani IS, and I have this bridge for sale,,,
And jsut because Putin's war is illegal, I'm going to give you a special military operations deal of a lifetime!
Two! Not one! But two Ukraine's for the price of one, right over than bridge,,,
Izyum, my dear, Izyum. Izyum, Kupyansk, Lysychansk,... these are all on the critical arteries providing troops and materiel to the russian invaders up and down the east of Ukraine. The rooskies themselves have acknowledged that the Ukrainians have struck a severe blow to russian morale and logistics.
There's nothing cynical in beating back an invader and doing so in a way that impresses the world to continue supporting your fight to preserve your sovereignty and freedom. The Ukrainians don't need to advance where the russians are because the Ukrainians are already there :) - resisting, undermining, and making life hell for the invaders.
Most of the countries I listed have been willing to be cordial with russia, but they have no problem telling russia to pound sand when necessary. Azerbaijan, for example, isn't taking orders from Moscow on whether to secure Azerbaijani territory occupied by Armenia. For its part, Armenia (as another example) refused to take Pootie's bait, and contrary to Kremlin desires, *re-elected* Nikol Pashinyan, LOL!
The Ukrainians are looking out for their best interests against an invasive tribe to their north that has tried for 300 years to subjugate or wipe them out. The russians can't stand the fact that they are just a large backwater gas station with lots of empty land and little in the way of global respect or influence.
For the shear amount of personnel and material that russia has to move, they have only a few land routes they can use, all of which are well within range of HIMARs.
The U.S. has been cordial with russia as long as the russians are willing to be civilized. The fashion sense of russians is 20 years behind. The civilization sense of russians is 200 years behind, so the U.S. and other civilized countries have had to bring out the rod. Spare the rod, spoil the child.
Luhansk and Donetsk are Ukrainian, per international law and per the agreement signed *by russia*. This is despite russian efforts at depopulating them of Ukrainian people over the past century.
Russia has self determination. So does China. The only thing anyone is stopping - or trying to to stop - is using force on other countries. If they leave Ukraine alone, don't invade Taiwan etc. then there's no problem.
The countries that want to be in Nato also have self determination. And they use it to join Nato because they want to. And Russia just proved them absolutely right to do so.
I wonder what your high minded thoughts would be if an aggressive world power were amassing proxy forces on your border, and bombarding your people on what used to be your land.
I agree with most of what you said, and have been confused by the blathering on both sides after "the offensive". The incredibly rapid and organized withdrawal tells me they were expecting it, but decided that they couldn’t or didn’t want to counter it. Ru is greatly concerned with avoiding casualties. The reality of the limited manpower they committed likely made it necessary to withdraw to the east of the Oskil river. Ru has shown that it can achieve very advantageous kill ratios as long as it fights on its own terms and maximizes artillery advantage. I believe they will continue to avoid any direct engagements were they don't have the upper hand. This may not be the stuff of heroic war movies, but it will accomplish the mission over time at minimal cost. The only questions are - how many times can the West reconstitute the UA and how many times can RA destroy it all over again. My feeling is that Russia can play this game for far longer
1. "achieve very advantageous kill ratios": I don't think you know what is actually happening! Russia has 50,000 dead as evidenced from Request Authorization from Finance Ministry to MOD to pay for death benefits! Ukraine death is not even up to 13,000 INCLUDING civilians
2. "accomplish the mission over time at minimal cost"; You call the destruction of ALL Russian modern equipment minimal cost? UA is getting ENDLESS supply from the west!
3. How "many times can the West reconstitute the UA': Many times and the Kharkiv offensive bears the testimony! Those were the first group of western trained UA! Do not forget the USA lend-lease to UA, same as was given to USSR in WW2! More weapons coming to Ukraine, Russia reduced to scraping weapon stores for obsolete equipment.
4. How many "times can RA destroy it all over again": Here you are wrong, the Russian Army is being destroyed at an unprecedented level! In seven days of fighting 12,000 Russian casualties including over 3,000 dead.
This is where the internal inconsistencies become a problem. If Russian military casualties vastly exceed civilian casualties, that generally means that Russia is taking pains to avoid civilian deaths. Contrast this with Afghanistan, where the US killed 50 000 civilians for the loss of 2000 dead Americans, and where it was clear that America valued its soldiers far more than the lives of ordinary Afghan civilians.
Either the Russians are getting slaughtered without so much as landing a glove on the Ukrainians *or* Putin is a genocidal maniac wantonly killing civilians on a scale that would put Hitler to shame. You can't have both.
It wasn't an "organized" withdrawal at all. The sheer amount of *intact* equipment left behind indicates this was not planned or intended or predicted,... or organized. No, the russians are not concerned with avoiding casualties, not of their own, and especially not casualties among Ukrainian civilians. You have to remember that russians don't have the same value toward life that civilized countries do.
It's not simply a matter of replenishing raw equipment and supplies, it also boils down to strategic and tactical professionalism and skill. The russians have exhibited very poor military planning, and poor tactical and strategic thinking. The Ukrainians, by contrast, have demonstrated just the opposite.
The Ukrainians have been playing this game for 300 years. They can play it another 300 years if necessary. Morale is on the side of the Ukrainians, and they can play this game until Pootie dies within the next 25 years. The russians, on the other hand, are a dying star,... and a dying animal. They might lash out in their final throes, but soon, russia will be just a husk. We're seeing that now with its military, and the laughable absence of professionalism within it.
Biden is an IDIOT, but HE did not start this war. He wouldn't know how. Most of the time he doesn't even know what day it is. Putin started this war, trying to expand Ru to its former Soviet Union borders. He thought Ukraine to be weak and an easy victim so he took the chance. He is not concerned with civilian casualties either. At this point he is afraid to quit, looking a fool to all the world and especially at home. Neither would he have to threaten the world with the use of nuclear weapons if he were confident that he had the backing of world public opinion.
Other countries continue to help Ukraine because it does not have the capability to fight a protracted war against a neighborhood bully intent on enslaving it's people again in the name of trying to reconstitute the former failed Soviet Union.
Just keep on consuming your own propaganda! You are still not wising up, see where propaganda has led Putin? The Russian Army is being destroyed in Ukraine!
Nato mostly goes wherever wants Nato. Except it held off on going to Ukraine because Russia wasn't happy.
It's perhaps unacceptable to Russia for other countries to join Nato. But it's unacceptable to other countries for Russia to decide who can and cannot join Nato or for Russia to have special privileges in this respect.
Nato is a defensive alliance. The idea that it would attack a peaceful Russia is laughable. It won't even give long range weapons to Ukraine just now.
The countries that want to join do so because they fear Russia. Russia, by behaving as it has, has absolutely shown that countries were right to want to join Nato and Nato is right to want to increase its missile defence capabilities.
Love the elementary school teacher logic, but this isn't a classroom. NATO bombs whoever they want. They'll fabricate the reasons. They bombed Libya for no legitimate reason whatsoever, and now that country is in a three way civil war.
Ukraine has been a Western-NATO-proxy war field vs RFussia since the USSR collapsed.
It's alkso the 4th most corrupt gov't on earth but that would be underestimating American Pols who have been using Ukraine as a base of ops-money lundering-illegal defense apparatus for decades.
NATO is no longer defensive, after the Warsaw Pact collapsed.
America and its NAO allies destoryed Libya, armed Aab Spring rebels at Benghazi and were moving into Syria when Russia decided "no more".
Russia has abot twice the land massbut half U.S. population. They don't need more territory. They are concerned about broder security (novel, huh?)
PUtin and Lavrov put definitive proposals ont eh table 2 years ago and never got an answer to their concerns.
Biden jprovoked this war by doingexactly Russia declared unacceptable and unacceptable for the same reasons JFK did the Cuban Missile Crisis and President Munro declared his Doctrine.
In fact, even John Foster Dulles, the dulest of the dull U.S. SoS, understood spheres of influence.
Telling peopole you want peace means you actaully understand what all the gripes are.
Now the First Army that Putin recreated in 2014 is smashed - a Potemkin military from a dwarf with zero defense background. Game over for Putin-Chabad.
It is almost impossible to believe that the russian military intelligence was unanware of the preparations for the Kharkov offensive, when even russian telegram channels posted info about an ukrainian build up with the assumed intention to push for Balakliya on Aug. 30th. That is almost an entire week before it started.
e.g.: t.me/intelslava -> search for "Important! There are messages from local residents" this should get to the right post.
Mobilization would damage the economy, leading to increasing shortages of domestic goods. The videos of mothers crying over the death sof their sons, forced to fight with minimal equipment and inexperienced (and so incompetent) command in a war they did not choose will lose Putin so much support he'd be toast. And he knows that.
And what do you think is happening now? The mere fact of ANNOUNCING a mobilization does not make the situation better than it is! "Mobilization is not a magical word such that when you say "MOBILIZATION" then PRESTO everything magically appears? Nonsense!
Libya was sponsoring terrorism around the world worse than Iran does today. Gaddafi had to go. The big difference between Libya and Russia, is Russia is a bully towards it's former Soviet border countries, trying to bring them back into the fold. Putin isn't much better than Gaddafi when it comes to how he values the lives of his "subjects" or the lives of the Ukrainian Civilians.
AND - Quit saying that Biden provoked or started this war. Biden could not start anything. He does not even know which way is up most of the time. If you listened to any of his speeches and how he cannot even read from the teleprompter most of the time you'd know just how limited his faculties are. PUTIN started this war. Period.
All the Russian MoD does is lie. Basing your theory on obvious lies (difficult to shoot people while you’re running away) is naive. And total war works both ways.
that sounds like the typical NATO simp take with no connection to reality.
This is a reasonable and balanced analysis which I mostly support. Luring or coercing Russia into a full war escalation will come at the price of Putin the evil dictator but what are the alternatives given that most of the propaganda in the west portrays him as that anyway. Very difficult situation for Russia. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. Give that the encroachment and provocation are existential threats to Russia, there is really only one choice, escalate and flatten the Ukraine. Yes that makes Putin the monster....
Balanced? Keep on believing this skewed nonsense! Ukraine shall destroy Russia and it is doing so as we speak! Balance? This war is the beginning of the disintegration of Russian FEDERATION.
The disintegration of the russians is squarely upon the russians' own shoulders. Unfortunately, the russian mind is unable to accept culpability when they are at fault, so they must seek a scapegoat in order to save face.
Ukraine's sovereignty is what Pootie hates.
Ukraine's sovereignty is not an existential threat to russia.
Ukraine's sovereignty is an existential threat to russian expansionism.
Pootie hasn't waged total war because, quite simply, he doesn't have the resources to do it.
thanks for the baby talk, I suppose it works with you?
I'm just speaking to your level to ensure you understand <3.
"Russian Expansionism"? You forget we are in the 21st Century? Russia would now be disintegrated, when the Chechens, Buryiats, Tvers, etc, etc return from the war and start seeking their own self determination!
Yes to all that.
But at the end of the day, Russia defended Kherson, which was important, at the expense of Kharkov, which wasn't.
What did Ukraine actually gain from its ruse d'guerre besides a face saving victory to justify more U.S. bailout, as pointed out?
Was there any strategic or tactical advantage?
Seems Russian intelligence knew there was going to be a serious attack somewhere and stripped Kharkov to meet it so they haven't been entirely in the dark about NATO supply.
Russian intelligence was also busy with terrorist attacks in the south which would also indicate an impending attack there, that "resistance" business: and Darya Dugin.
IDK I don't see how this really changes much of anything except how its perceived, which is important, of course.
But it's also a cheap shot that can easily backfire on its perpetrators since a ruse works only with a bit of luck, which one must never count on.
Had the Russians figured it out in time, the Kharkov salient could have beome ducks in a barrel.
Bet, they'll be more wary.
As for Putin, who knows? He has a lot of angles to cover.
He really doesn't want this war. That is obvious.
Actually, russia is still losing Kherson.
Ukraine regained a huge swathe of territory and severed a critical russian resupply artery for the whole of Donbas.
There were both strategic and tactical advantages that were achieved by the Ukrainians. Additionally, the fleeing rooskies left behind huge piles of still-usable armored vehicles and ammunition. The evidence is not of an orderly repositioning, but a fleeing army low on morale.
Pootie very much wanted this war. Pootie's main problem is that only about 3 of russia's immediate neighbors or former Soviet republics has been willing to bow before Moscow. Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, China, the U.S., Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan have forged their own paths, and in many cases, have told russia to go f**k itself.
I think you are being too generous.
Kharkov isn't en route to Kherson and you haven't listed any of these strategic or tactical advantages.
I can't either.
IT was a cynical show boat, IMO, for more money.
Yes, the Russians retreated. But fact remians, that Ukies can advance only where Russians aren't, not the other way around, which is how you win a war.
It was a clever ruse. I 'll give it that. But that's war. You always guess whether intellignce is as it appears or what the enemy wants to you to think.
Many of those countries you listed are either aligned with Russia or never were, unless you're going back to FDR and Stalin.
Multipolarity means countries look out for their own best interest rather than follow U.S. blindly.
Of course, they won't do whatever Russia wants but, more imporant, is that they won't do whatever America wants either.
"self determination of all nations" I think Woodrow Wilosn siad,,,
"strategic or tactical advantages"? What do you call 25,000 trapped Russian troops on the West side of the Dnipro River without resupply and constantly and slowly whittled by Ukrainian Forces?? They are out of the war, either surrender, starvation and freezing, or destruction!
And the other 10 BTGs on those defensive positions on the East side of the river?
Russia is now reacting to Ukraine's initiatives and that is the first sign that Russia is FUCKED!
Yeah! WoW!
Freezing in early fall.
Hell of thing!
I call it hog wash.
Russia has been collapsing since the special opertaion began, we are told.
Ruses and retreats are nothing new, Sport. You're grasping at straws.
"Russia has been collapsing since the special opertaion began, we are told."
That's by no means been the consensus on Western media.... generally very cautious about Ukraine's chance of success
I'm saying that it is *now* obvious how badly the russian armed forces had rotted from within. Originally, there was a presumption among most if not all of us that, yes, the russian military was an unstoppable behemoth. It turns out that russia has the second most powerful military,... in Ukraine.
And now we are seeing that russia has indeed been collapsing since their illegal war began.
Sweetie, it's not "ruses and threats" when both the russians and the documented evidence on the ground are in agreement that russian forces have been routed, LOL!
Yeah, and China is also on the verge of collapse, SPort.
Bassr Assad is still winning his war, Qasm Soleimani was plotting evil deads, the Taliban is our friend and can be rusted, jus tlike Pakistani IS, and I have this bridge for sale,,,
And jsut because Putin's war is illegal, I'm going to give you a special military operations deal of a lifetime!
Two! Not one! But two Ukraine's for the price of one, right over than bridge,,,
Izyum, my dear, Izyum. Izyum, Kupyansk, Lysychansk,... these are all on the critical arteries providing troops and materiel to the russian invaders up and down the east of Ukraine. The rooskies themselves have acknowledged that the Ukrainians have struck a severe blow to russian morale and logistics.
There's nothing cynical in beating back an invader and doing so in a way that impresses the world to continue supporting your fight to preserve your sovereignty and freedom. The Ukrainians don't need to advance where the russians are because the Ukrainians are already there :) - resisting, undermining, and making life hell for the invaders.
Most of the countries I listed have been willing to be cordial with russia, but they have no problem telling russia to pound sand when necessary. Azerbaijan, for example, isn't taking orders from Moscow on whether to secure Azerbaijani territory occupied by Armenia. For its part, Armenia (as another example) refused to take Pootie's bait, and contrary to Kremlin desires, *re-elected* Nikol Pashinyan, LOL!
The Ukrainians are looking out for their best interests against an invasive tribe to their north that has tried for 300 years to subjugate or wipe them out. The russians can't stand the fact that they are just a large backwater gas station with lots of empty land and little in the way of global respect or influence.
Russia can't use other land routes?
The U.S. has been willing to be cordial with Russia?
Luhansk and Donets are Urkainian?
For the shear amount of personnel and material that russia has to move, they have only a few land routes they can use, all of which are well within range of HIMARs.
The U.S. has been cordial with russia as long as the russians are willing to be civilized. The fashion sense of russians is 20 years behind. The civilization sense of russians is 200 years behind, so the U.S. and other civilized countries have had to bring out the rod. Spare the rod, spoil the child.
Luhansk and Donetsk are Ukrainian, per international law and per the agreement signed *by russia*. This is despite russian efforts at depopulating them of Ukrainian people over the past century.
"Multi-poliarity"
Russia has self determination. So does China. The only thing anyone is stopping - or trying to to stop - is using force on other countries. If they leave Ukraine alone, don't invade Taiwan etc. then there's no problem.
The countries that want to be in Nato also have self determination. And they use it to join Nato because they want to. And Russia just proved them absolutely right to do so.
stopping the use of force in other coutnries by using force in other countries,,,
So what is it Russia wants to do, apart from invade Ukraine, that the west or nato is stopping them from doing?
China is not "multipolar"
It's using Russia's multipolar policy to advance its own mercantile imperialism on teh old British buy-loan and invade model.
NATO countries are really just as bad visa vie America.
You are confusing the military aggressor with the political aggressor.
War is, after all, polics by other means.
I wonder what your high minded thoughts would be if an aggressive world power were amassing proxy forces on your border, and bombarding your people on what used to be your land.
1) you mean the migrant caravans crossing our southern borders?
Yes, why don't do something baouit that rather than Ukriane.
2) Europe has always had foreign armioes next door.
But they have dealt with that fact better than with Amrica intervening.
As before, Russia laid out reasonable concerns which could have avoided all this but Biden chose arrogance leaving Russia no choice.
No, I would not want debauched NATO forces on my border, nor UN forces, for that matter, even if allied with WDC, because I don't trust them either.
Just to confirm
- the proxy force is Ukraine's army in Ukraine?
- the land used to be part of Russia when?
Ukie forces are bought and paid for many times over by the U.S.
It's a financial basket case. America owns it. It's owned Ukraine for a long time.
Ukraine was part of Tsarist and Soviet Russia. (Remember, when Axis and Central Powers attacked Russia, they invaded Ukraine?
Yeah, I think I said all that somewhere here.
Multipoarilty works for Russia but China is only using it as a vehicle against U.S. in their own bid for mercantile global hegemony.
Putin started the war, so how can you figure he really doesn't want it?!
I agree with most of what you said, and have been confused by the blathering on both sides after "the offensive". The incredibly rapid and organized withdrawal tells me they were expecting it, but decided that they couldn’t or didn’t want to counter it. Ru is greatly concerned with avoiding casualties. The reality of the limited manpower they committed likely made it necessary to withdraw to the east of the Oskil river. Ru has shown that it can achieve very advantageous kill ratios as long as it fights on its own terms and maximizes artillery advantage. I believe they will continue to avoid any direct engagements were they don't have the upper hand. This may not be the stuff of heroic war movies, but it will accomplish the mission over time at minimal cost. The only questions are - how many times can the West reconstitute the UA and how many times can RA destroy it all over again. My feeling is that Russia can play this game for far longer
Let me address a few points in your narrative.
1. "achieve very advantageous kill ratios": I don't think you know what is actually happening! Russia has 50,000 dead as evidenced from Request Authorization from Finance Ministry to MOD to pay for death benefits! Ukraine death is not even up to 13,000 INCLUDING civilians
2. "accomplish the mission over time at minimal cost"; You call the destruction of ALL Russian modern equipment minimal cost? UA is getting ENDLESS supply from the west!
3. How "many times can the West reconstitute the UA': Many times and the Kharkiv offensive bears the testimony! Those were the first group of western trained UA! Do not forget the USA lend-lease to UA, same as was given to USSR in WW2! More weapons coming to Ukraine, Russia reduced to scraping weapon stores for obsolete equipment.
4. How many "times can RA destroy it all over again": Here you are wrong, the Russian Army is being destroyed at an unprecedented level! In seven days of fighting 12,000 Russian casualties including over 3,000 dead.
Russia is FUCKED BIG TIME!!
This is where the internal inconsistencies become a problem. If Russian military casualties vastly exceed civilian casualties, that generally means that Russia is taking pains to avoid civilian deaths. Contrast this with Afghanistan, where the US killed 50 000 civilians for the loss of 2000 dead Americans, and where it was clear that America valued its soldiers far more than the lives of ordinary Afghan civilians.
Either the Russians are getting slaughtered without so much as landing a glove on the Ukrainians *or* Putin is a genocidal maniac wantonly killing civilians on a scale that would put Hitler to shame. You can't have both.
I won’t bother arguing with CNN. Time will tell.
It wasn't an "organized" withdrawal at all. The sheer amount of *intact* equipment left behind indicates this was not planned or intended or predicted,... or organized. No, the russians are not concerned with avoiding casualties, not of their own, and especially not casualties among Ukrainian civilians. You have to remember that russians don't have the same value toward life that civilized countries do.
It's not simply a matter of replenishing raw equipment and supplies, it also boils down to strategic and tactical professionalism and skill. The russians have exhibited very poor military planning, and poor tactical and strategic thinking. The Ukrainians, by contrast, have demonstrated just the opposite.
The Ukrainians have been playing this game for 300 years. They can play it another 300 years if necessary. Morale is on the side of the Ukrainians, and they can play this game until Pootie dies within the next 25 years. The russians, on the other hand, are a dying star,... and a dying animal. They might lash out in their final throes, but soon, russia will be just a husk. We're seeing that now with its military, and the laughable absence of professionalism within it.
Don't fix what isn't broken.
Putin and Lavrov put thier concerns on the tables 2 years ago and got nothing but rebuff.
They waited for a response until the response was, that NATO goes wherever it wants.
Biden started this war, not Russia, and it's Biden who is desperate at this point.
He can't afford another Afghanistan defeat and inflation is already destorying him before he's put any significant numbers fo troops in ukraine.
Biden is an IDIOT, but HE did not start this war. He wouldn't know how. Most of the time he doesn't even know what day it is. Putin started this war, trying to expand Ru to its former Soviet Union borders. He thought Ukraine to be weak and an easy victim so he took the chance. He is not concerned with civilian casualties either. At this point he is afraid to quit, looking a fool to all the world and especially at home. Neither would he have to threaten the world with the use of nuclear weapons if he were confident that he had the backing of world public opinion.
Other countries continue to help Ukraine because it does not have the capability to fight a protracted war against a neighborhood bully intent on enslaving it's people again in the name of trying to reconstitute the former failed Soviet Union.
Just keep on consuming your own propaganda! You are still not wising up, see where propaganda has led Putin? The Russian Army is being destroyed in Ukraine!
uh huh
"NATO goes wherever it wants"
Nato mostly goes wherever wants Nato. Except it held off on going to Ukraine because Russia wasn't happy.
It's perhaps unacceptable to Russia for other countries to join Nato. But it's unacceptable to other countries for Russia to decide who can and cannot join Nato or for Russia to have special privileges in this respect.
Nato is a defensive alliance. The idea that it would attack a peaceful Russia is laughable. It won't even give long range weapons to Ukraine just now.
The countries that want to join do so because they fear Russia. Russia, by behaving as it has, has absolutely shown that countries were right to want to join Nato and Nato is right to want to increase its missile defence capabilities.
Love the elementary school teacher logic, but this isn't a classroom. NATO bombs whoever they want. They'll fabricate the reasons. They bombed Libya for no legitimate reason whatsoever, and now that country is in a three way civil war.
Fair point. Parts of Nato have intervened in ways that weren't justified and have gone badly in Libya and Iraq.
Still, this in no way threatens Russia and countries jining Nato are doing so for defensive reasons.
Yes it does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan
Ukraine has been a Western-NATO-proxy war field vs RFussia since the USSR collapsed.
It's alkso the 4th most corrupt gov't on earth but that would be underestimating American Pols who have been using Ukraine as a base of ops-money lundering-illegal defense apparatus for decades.
NATO missiles in Ukraine? Oh, please.
You can read Wiki, and believe propaganda all you want. It is not going to change reality.
You haven't been keeping up.
NATO is no longer defensive, after the Warsaw Pact collapsed.
America and its NAO allies destoryed Libya, armed Aab Spring rebels at Benghazi and were moving into Syria when Russia decided "no more".
Russia has abot twice the land massbut half U.S. population. They don't need more territory. They are concerned about broder security (novel, huh?)
PUtin and Lavrov put definitive proposals ont eh table 2 years ago and never got an answer to their concerns.
Biden jprovoked this war by doingexactly Russia declared unacceptable and unacceptable for the same reasons JFK did the Cuban Missile Crisis and President Munro declared his Doctrine.
In fact, even John Foster Dulles, the dulest of the dull U.S. SoS, understood spheres of influence.
Telling peopole you want peace means you actaully understand what all the gripes are.
Now the First Army that Putin recreated in 2014 is smashed - a Potemkin military from a dwarf with zero defense background. Game over for Putin-Chabad.
It is almost impossible to believe that the russian military intelligence was unanware of the preparations for the Kharkov offensive, when even russian telegram channels posted info about an ukrainian build up with the assumed intention to push for Balakliya on Aug. 30th. That is almost an entire week before it started.
e.g.: t.me/intelslava -> search for "Important! There are messages from local residents" this should get to the right post.
What a load of horseshit.
You are damn right! At a point I thought the narrative was on a different war!
Mobilization would damage the economy, leading to increasing shortages of domestic goods. The videos of mothers crying over the death sof their sons, forced to fight with minimal equipment and inexperienced (and so incompetent) command in a war they did not choose will lose Putin so much support he'd be toast. And he knows that.
And what do you think is happening now? The mere fact of ANNOUNCING a mobilization does not make the situation better than it is! "Mobilization is not a magical word such that when you say "MOBILIZATION" then PRESTO everything magically appears? Nonsense!
Putin-Chabad is just about done murdering Slavs
Murdering Slavs has been going on for 8 years in Ukraine. Regime change....
Dear Vatnik, most of the dead were soldiers.
Per UNHRC, 13,200–13,400 people killed
total. Breakdown is
--3,901 civilians
--4,200 Ukrainian military
--5,800 Russian military & proxies But for Russian army picking a war there, no one would have died
So who caused it? Keep on consuming the Russian propaganda that has led Putin to deastate the Russian Army!
Yes, it's time for a regime change in Moscow.
just like Libya,,,
Libya was sponsoring terrorism around the world worse than Iran does today. Gaddafi had to go. The big difference between Libya and Russia, is Russia is a bully towards it's former Soviet border countries, trying to bring them back into the fold. Putin isn't much better than Gaddafi when it comes to how he values the lives of his "subjects" or the lives of the Ukrainian Civilians.
AND - Quit saying that Biden provoked or started this war. Biden could not start anything. He does not even know which way is up most of the time. If you listened to any of his speeches and how he cannot even read from the teleprompter most of the time you'd know just how limited his faculties are. PUTIN started this war. Period.