Русский корабль - иди нахуй

[Nivek 16753]

Does she want to participate in a foreign exchange program?   She can come live with me and they get the guy with Edgar Allen Poe's avatar.   

[Nivek 16753]

47 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

Then Moldova has nothing to fear from those fucks.  

Edited February 15, 2023 by Nivek

[Schulz2.0 28710]

 

[statsman 5361]

This is supposed to be the “share” link from my WSJ sub. Does it work for y’all? If not, I’ll copy the article later. 
 
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-russian-double-strike-that-killed-a-u-s-medic-in-ukraine-they-had-us-in-sight-442cd058?st=jf6u7x8p5llyys2&reflink=share_mobilewebshare

It may piss you off. It’s about the Russians double tapping” civilian first responders, namely volunteer medic (aiding civilians hit by bombs) Pete Reed. 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11667]

1 hour ago, MillerEP said:

 

Xi:  Did I say Taiwan has always been a part of China? I meant Siberia has always been a part of China.  

[The Dog 43714]

Good summary of what's up with Moldova:

I've heard of the possibility of Moldova merging with Romania but not sure how much appetite there is for it domestically. It does solve the whole EU/NATO membership problem for them though.

[bolverk 29245]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

This is supposed to be the “share” link from my WSJ sub. Does it work for y’all? If not, I’ll copy the article later. 
 
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-russian-double-strike-that-killed-a-u-s-medic-in-ukraine-they-had-us-in-sight-442cd058?st=jf6u7x8p5llyys2&reflink=share_mobilewebshare

It may piss you off. It’s about the Russians double tapping” civilian first responders, namely volunteer medic (aiding civilians hit by bombs) Pete Reed. 

Yep, it worked. Very helpful to see the photographs too. Thanks for sharing that way.

[Schulz2.0 28710]

 

[atomheartbevo 89301]

2 hours ago, MillerEP said:

 

Archer (not that Archer)

 

[atomheartbevo 89301]

8 hours ago, KYHorn said:

 

 

 

I'm going to tell my grandkids that this was Jefferson Davis.

[SL Xpress 7503]

1 hour ago, Bevo said:

I guess the slow supply is still a thing - maybe we want to deplete Russia's capabilities - I guess fear of escalation could be a possibility as well, but I don't see how slowly releasing weapons lessens the possibility of escalation. Maybe it is just rhetoric until Ukraine pilots are fully trained.

 

I don't pretend to know the exact theories being put into place, but I can make some guesses. 

First of all, there's no way there's one voice in the administration making all the calls on Ukraine. There are a lot of voices in the room, and sometimes one is going to carry more weight than others. That's not unique to this administration. That's group dynamics at play. Who can be the loudest and most effective voice is sometimes about ability, charisma, and having the most compelling arguments. But sometimes it's about timing. Arguments that don't hold sway a year ago suddenly become more compelling. Or a more hawkish voice that people listen to a couple of months ago is now overshadowed for whatever reason by another voice preaching more caution. 

Second of all, there's more reservations about funding Ukraine's efforts in Congress than there were a year ago. Big ticket items like F-16 aircraft (or even Abrams tanks) may be seen as not in Ukraine's best interests as opposed to Bradleys/Strykers, air defense systems, lots of ammunition, sundry supplies, and more ammunition. If no choice has to be made, that's one thing. But if choices do have to be made with a limited amount of resources, F-16s may start falling down the priority list real quick.

As far as a slow release, the alternative is a massive shipment of arms and equipment Ukraine is neither logistically, tactically, or strategically able to take advantage of, and given limited resources, may mean the US can't supply something that becomes more important later on as the circumstances on the battlefield shift. To me the slow release procedure the US has been following is the only approach that makes the most sense, frankly. 

I've said this before, and knowing me I'll say it dozens of more times. Both sides of this conflict are operating with time pressures. On the Russian side they can only count on this war continuing as long as Putin is in power. As soon as he dies, everything in Russia goes cuckoo. Even if someone else takes his place rather quickly - which I seriously doubt will happen given his purposeful lack of a succession plan to prioritize he stays in power - they'll also have to secure power. We may very easily see a rapid succession of Russian leaders until someone secures power on a more permanent basis. But leadership matters, whether it's the football coach, the CEO, the president, or the head of the local literacy group. When there's a change in leadership, there's a huge danger the whole dynamic changes. Unless you're Ohio State football, in which case it doesn't matter who is in charge.

For Ukraine, they are supported by a bunch of representative governments. Peaceful transitions of power are representative governments' superpower, but they're also their kryptonite. If you're the party not in power, there's not a lot of credit you're going to get for supporting the party in power in whatever they're trying to achieve. It doesn't work that way. So there's always going to be the incentive to go against what the party in power is doing, in hopes of winning support for that position. You're not going to get a parking place following behind another car in a crowded parking lot. You have to forge a different path. In addition, the United States as a people don't actually give a rat's ass about what goes on in the rest of the world. They just don't. They never have. So there's a lot of hay to be made by appealing to Americans' natural isolationist tendencies. But the same kind of dynamic can occur anywhere. 

Without the West's ongoing support, Ukraine doesn't stand a chance. Wars are about resources, and Russia, even in a depleted state, simply has a much greater means of prosecuting this war than Ukraine does if forced to stand by itself. I don't care how brave the Ukrainian soldiers are - and they're incredibly brave. If they don't have the equipment, they're going to get rolled over. Even a stalemate is at Ukraine's disadvantage (excepting the above point that when Putin dies everything changes). Their country has been methodically destroyed. They've lost a huge proportion of their population, which may or may not return. An attritional war affects Ukraine proportionately worse than it does Russia. But even beyond that, there's a cultural fatalism and nihilism in Russia that Ukraine with its Western aspirations doesn't have. They actually value human life in a way Russia does not. For that reason among many I'd love to see Ukraine have the means to make some decisive gains to possibly limit Russian forces to the eastern Donbas region, where the only reason they're not driven out completely is because no encirclement is realistically possible any more. An attritional war favors Russia and it's national ethos much more than Ukraine, IMO. 

[atomheartbevo 89301]

13 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

For Ukraine, they are supported by a bunch of representative governments. Peaceful transitions of power are representative governments' superpower, but they're also their kryptonite.

I agree with a lot of what you said, but two things jump out that make the West’s support a little more concrete, even if the average citizen doesn’t realize it:

1. Russia has beaten the drum over and over that when they finish with Ukraine, they will be going after Moldova and the Baltics and others.   This ends with Russian defeat in Ukraine, or begins with Russians shedding European and American blood outside of Ukraine.  And they will try and use nuclear blackmail to keep the West from hitting targets inside of Russia   

2. If Russia succeeds in Ukraine, Russia would control 30% of the world's wheat, 20% of the world's corn, and 60% of the world's sunflower oil.  This is unacceptable to Europe, the US, and many other countries, because it would destabilize the world.  People bitch about food prices, but they ain’t seen nothing as Putin would raise prices to rebuild his economy.  

[MillerEP 30311]

 

 

[MillerEP 30311]

 

[Parliament 14083]

54 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Archer (not that Archer)

 

My God that's a beautiful piece of destructive machinery.  I presume that thing is long gone before counterbattery fire gets there.  The Russians return fire just turns dirt?

Edited February 15, 2023 by Parliament

[SL Xpress 7503]

16 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

I agree with a lot of what you said, but two things jump out that make the West’s support a little more concrete, even if the average citizen doesn’t realize it:

1. Russia has beaten the drum over and over that when they finish with Ukraine, they will be going after Moldova and the Baltics and others.   This ends with Russian defeat in Ukraine, or begins with Russians shedding European and American blood outside of Ukraine.  And they will try and use nuclear blackmail to keep the West from hitting targets inside of Russia   

2. If Russia succeeds in Ukraine, Russia would control 30% of the world's wheat, 20% of the world's corn, and 60% of the world's sunflower oil.  This is unacceptable to Europe, the US, and many other countries, because it would destabilize the world.  People bitch about food prices, but they ain’t seen nothing as Putin would raise prices to rebuild his economy.  

I want to be clear I'm not arguing with you. I'm fully on board.

That said, here's me echoing other people's objections who have a voice in this:

1) "That's Europe's problem."

2) "Sounds like our farmers would do quite well."

The good news is the support is there. But counting on it being at the level it is currently with representative governments in charge of policy is not smart. That's not how it works. And again, Ukraine being in an attritional battle is not healthy for the future of that country. Having the ability to kick out the Russians is going to take a lot more material than has been sent thus far. The political will needs to match that. I'm not saying it won't. I'm saying the more times passes, the greater the chance the political will lessens, not grows. 

[MillerEP 30311]

^

 

[JesusSweatDuck 17780]

30 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

With night vision being so available for Ukraine and not Russian soldiers, you'd think they would prefer to attack during the day when Ukraine doesn't have such a definite advantage, but aggy gonna agg...err...Russia going to Russia

[JesusSweatDuck 17780]

26 minutes ago, Parliament said:

My God that's a beautiful piece of destructive machinery.  I presume that thing is long gone before counterbattery fire gets there.  The Russians return fire just turns dirt?

Correct, depends on the distance of the fire, but in general it has already left the area before the first shot has hit the ground so even if you have great radar detection, it's too late.

[SL Xpress 7503]

53 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

 

 

Okay, so apparently Atesh is a partisan group based out of Crimea made up mostly of Crimean Tatars. Which makes the "Atesh school" even more hilarious.

 

[MissingInAction 24733]

[Brisketexan 104217]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I agree with a lot of what you said, but two things jump out that make the West’s support a little more concrete, even if the average citizen doesn’t realize it:

1. Russia has beaten the drum over and over that when they finish with Ukraine, they will be going after Moldova and the Baltics and others.   This ends with Russian defeat in Ukraine, or begins with Russians shedding European and American blood outside of Ukraine.  And they will try and use nuclear blackmail to keep the West from hitting targets inside of Russia   

2. If Russia succeeds in Ukraine, Russia would control 30% of the world's wheat, 20% of the world's corn, and 60% of the world's sunflower oil.  This is unacceptable to Europe, the US, and many other countries, because it would destabilize the world.  People bitch about food prices, but they ain’t seen nothing as Putin would raise prices to rebuild his economy.  

This.  What is happening is a war of empires.  We can feel all we want about how we don't want to be an empire, we don't want to play those games, blah blah blah -- that doesn't matter.   Russia has decided to bring the war of empires to the world.  Opt out, and you WILL get fucked.

It is unacceptable for a Putin-led Russia (or ANY imperial Russia) to control that much of vital food commodities.  Period, full stop.  It can't be allowed.

[MillerEP 30311]

 

^Funny if true

 

[Viper 11991]

15 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

 

Okay, so apparently Atesh is a partisan group based out of Crimea made up mostly of Crimean Tatars. Which makes the "Atesh school" even more hilarious.

 

 

[Schulz2.0 28710]

 

[tokamak 6345]

55 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I want to be clear I'm not arguing with you. I'm fully on board.

That said, here's me echoing other people's objections who have a voice in this:

1) "That's Europe's problem."

2) "Sounds like our farmers would do quite well."

The good news is the support is there. But counting on it being at the level it is currently with representative governments in charge of policy is not smart. That's not how it works. And again, Ukraine being in an attritional battle is not healthy for the future of that country. Having the ability to kick out the Russians is going to take a lot more material than has been sent thus far. The political will needs to match that. I'm not saying it won't. I'm saying the more times passes, the greater the chance the political will lessens, not grows. 

I wonder if this is some of the reason why we're starting to stockpile stuff in Europe. If shit's already in Poland or Germany in warehouses, no one can win political points by bringing it back because at that point no one gives a shit. Or if the winds change in, say, Germany, they can just say "well it's not our shit going to Ukraine, we're just getting rid of all this icky American stuff".

[SL Xpress 7503]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  What is happening is a war of empires.  We can feel all we want about how we don't want to be an empire, we don't want to play those games, blah blah blah -- that doesn't matter.   Russia has decided to bring the war of empires to the world.  Opt out, and you WILL get fucked.

It is unacceptable for a Putin-led Russia (or ANY imperial Russia) to control that much of vital food commodities.  Period, full stop.  It can't be allowed.

You act as if Ukraine has been an independent country its entire existence. 

If not for the Orange and Maidan Revolutions, that's exactly what would have happened, and the West wouldn't have done a damn thing about it. If Russia hadn't stupidly invaded for what amounts to a religious tribal jihad, they would have still been able to greatly influence matters in Ukraine simply by massing hundreds of thousands of troops on the border, without actually getting them all killed. And again, there was going to be very little the West was going to do. 

This red line you're creating in your head doesn't actually exist. It never has. 

[SL Xpress 7503]

3 minutes ago, tokamak said:

I wonder if this is some of the reason why we're starting to stockpile stuff in Europe. If shit's already in Poland or Germany in warehouses, no one can win political points by bringing it back because at that point no one gives a shit. Or if the winds change in, say, Germany, they can just say "well it's not our shit going to Ukraine, we're just getting rid of all this icky American stuff".

I don't know the answer, but my opinion is the stuff is already funded by the bill passed last year. 

I also continue to believe there's enough bipartisan support something can be done this year. But the political machinations are more complicated than they were last year. The first priority is figuring out how to pass an annual budget and figure out the debt ceiling stuff. That affects financially supporting Ukraine, but by necessity takes priority and has its own power dynamics around it. I'm not arguing for or against either side of the issue. I've made it clear I'm a one issue guy at this point. 

It does make sense to me to forward deploy as much as possible, for all kinds of reasons, including the ones you're stating. But mostly because if the funding is already there - which it is based on the bill passed last year (to my knowledge, anyway) - and the president gives his authorization, why not have it already in Germany or Poland or where ever, rather than in the United States, if you know it's going to Ukraine at some point anyway. 

[Brisketexan 104217]

3 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

You act as if Ukraine has been an independent country its entire existence. 

If not for the Orange and Maidan Revolutions, that's exactly what would have happened, and the West wouldn't have done a damn thing about it. If Russia hadn't stupidly invaded for what amounts to a religious tribal jihad, they would have still been able to greatly influence matters in Ukraine simply by massing hundreds of thousands of troops on the border, without actually getting them all killed. And again, there was going to be very little the West was going to do. 

This red line you're creating in your head doesn't actually exist. It never has. 

Except that now Russia has made it clear that if and when it gains full control of those resources, it will use them to wage economic war.

The "red line" is that Russia has ripped off the mask.  It is not a nation state that can be trusted at all, ever.  It will use anything and everything at its disposal to wage war on whoever it wishes, and it will use that power to inflict serious harm.

Before, we could fool ourselves into believing that Russia wouldn't use that power that way.  Dealing with Russia is undeniably a zero-sum game.  The veneer is gone, and there's no lying, especially not to ourselves.  Which is yet another reason why invading Ukraine was such a COLOSSAL strategic blunder; Russia had a pretty good setup going.  It had the veneer of a "legitimate state and trading partner," allowing it to reach deeply into the affairs and business of numerous western nations.  It burned that to ashes in functionally an instant, and for what?

[InkaUtexas 25270]

2 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

 

Without the West's ongoing support, Ukraine doesn't stand a chance. Wars are about resources, and Russia, even in a depleted state, simply has a much greater means of prosecuting this war than Ukraine does if forced to stand by itself. I don't care how brave the Ukrainian soldiers are - and they're incredibly brave. If they don't have the equipment, they're going to get rolled over. Even a stalemate is at Ukraine's disadvantage (excepting the above point that when Putin dies everything changes). Their country has been methodically destroyed. They've lost a huge proportion of their population, which may or may not return. An attritional war affects Ukraine proportionately worse than it does Russia. But even beyond that, there's a cultural fatalism and nihilism in Russia that Ukraine with its Western aspirations doesn't have. They actually value human life in a way Russia does not. For that reason among many I'd love to see Ukraine have the means to make some decisive gains to possibly limit Russian forces to the eastern Donbas region, where the only reason they're not driven out completely is because no encirclement is realistically possible any more. An attritional war favors Russia and it's national ethos much more than Ukraine, IMO. 

War is about desire. Please discuss the Taliban. Sure, it would not fit the image of modern war, but Ukraine would not lie down and it would take 20+ years to pacify them. Russia cannot afford the war, nor the peace. They lost. Fuck em. 

[atomheartbevo 89301]

2 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

Wars are about resources, and Russia, even in a depleted state, simply has a much greater means of prosecuting this war than Ukraine does if forced to stand by itself. I don't care how brave the Ukrainian soldiers are - and they're incredibly brave. If they don't have the equipment, they're going to get rolled over.

43 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

War is about desire. Please discuss the Taliban. Sure, it would not fit the image of modern war, but Ukraine would not lie down and it would take 20+ years to pacify them. Russia cannot afford the war, nor the peace. They lost. Fuck em. 

This - the US had a few more resources than the Taliban, and we spent 20 years there, and still ultimately left.

Russia does not have the arsenal that the West does (and most of what we are giving them is old stuff).  Russia's old stuff is absolutely shit, thanks to all of the corruption and the oligarchs taking resources from the military.

Lest we forget, Russia's military budget was less than $70 billion, while our budget is over $800 billion.  The oligarchs and Putin gutted their military, and it shows in things like how they store their older equipment - they can't use it now, unlike the US and Europe that can produce our surplus stuff and get it to the Ukrainians in working order.  And Russia's ass-backward military focused on fucking trains and not trucks.  It's insane that they are using shitty civilian vehicles to transport people and ammo.

The fact that Russia is making assaults without tanks and APCs/AFVs speaks volumes about all of their problems.  This isn't 1943 - they can't keep doing human waves against modern armies that have them under constant surveillance.

Quantity no longer has a quality all its own if you are facing off against a modern army with masses of manpower or 1960s tanks.

Edited February 15, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[Nivek 16753]

My guess is that the US is playing for the long game here.  Their army is in ruins, their soldiers are now made up largely of conscripts and convicts, and they have a WW1 European General's regard for the common man.    If Russia keeps losing this war, losing men, and wrecking their economy, then they are going to recreate a situation where revolution can get going.  

And of course, the market for mail-order brides is going to be explosive.  40+ yr old American women better watch out.  Because that is what really matters.  

[SL Xpress 7503]

29 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

This - the US had a few more resources than the Taliban, and we spent 20 years there, and still ultimately left.

Russia does not have the arsenal that the West does (and most of what we are giving them is old stuff).  Russia's old stuff is absolutely shit, thanks to all of the corruption and the oligarchs taking resources from the military.

Lest we forget, Russia's military budget was less than $70 billion, while our budget is over $800 billion.  The oligarchs and Putin gutted their military, and it shows in things like how they store their older equipment - they can't use it now, unlike the US and Europe that can produce our surplus stuff and get it to the Ukrainians in working order.  And Russia's ass-backward military focused on fucking trains and not trucks.  It's insane that they are using shitty civilian vehicles to transport people and ammo.

The fact that Russia is making assaults without tanks and APCs/AFVs speaks volumes about all of their problems.  This isn't 1943 - they can't keep doing human waves against modern armies that have them under constant surveillance.

Quantity no longer has a quality all its own if you are facing off against a modern army with masses of manpower or 1960s tanks.

Let's talk about all the ways Russia in Ukraine is different than the US in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was a war of vengeance, plain and simple. The US fucked up the occupations of both Afghanistan and Iraq so badly, it's hard to know where to begin. But what I'd start with is implementing a representative government. That's only the beginning, though. Not enough soldiers to fulfill an occupation. More weight given to what contractors wanted to provide than what communities actually needed. No holistic understanding of tribal conflicts and historic grievances. Not that everyone was ignorant of them, but many of the decision makers didn't care. Frankly, shunting resources to prosecute the war in Iraq wasn't a huge help, either. 

In any case, the US didn't want to actually take over either country. They certainly didn't give a shit about the resources in Afghanistan.

Compare that to Ukraine. Russia is implementing a war of conquest, plain and simple. Even now they are in the process of attempting to eradicate the Ukrainian culture and identity in the occupied areas. The destruction of any written material in Ukrainian. The elimination of any cultural iconography that's not related to Russia, Russian, or the Russian Orthodox Church. The school system is being subsumed as an element of the state and cultural brainwashing even more overtly than is usually the case. 

Ukraine is considered a historic mistake. That's the Russian position. Did the US consider Afghanistan or Afghani people a mistake? I don't believe they even considered the Taliban a mistake, as much as they didn't want them taking power. 

As long as the West keeps providing arms, I'm sure Ukraine will hold out just fine for the reasons you're stating. But if the west had given Ukraine the same amount of support they did after Russia took over Crimea and instigated the takeover in the Donbas, Ukraine would be positively fucked right now. 

I don't agree that quantity no longer has quality, especially considering if not for the West, Russia would have quality and quantity. In everything. With a much greater means of producing more. 

I'll also point out that Iran fought Iraq to a standstill and by many measures actually won that war by doing exactly what you're suggesting can't be done any more. 

This is the equivalent of a religious war for Russia. Plain and simple. Sure, it's being driven by the man at the top, but the message resonates with a significant part of the populace. Certainly way more than a simple majority. If Putin lives and the West stops helping Ukraine to a significant degree, Russia would make significantly more progress than they're currently experiencing. 

I'm not predicting that's what will happen. I will say, however, that it's important the West has some kind of sense of urgency about Ukraine's success. For a variety of reasons. 

[Pescado_Rojo 19320]

39 minutes ago, Nivek said:

My guess is that the US is playing for the long game here.  Their army is in ruins, their soldiers are now made up largely of conscripts and convicts, and they have a WW1 European General's regard for the common man.    If Russia keeps losing this war, losing men, and wrecking their economy, then they are going to recreate a situation where revolution can get going.  

And of course, the market for mail-order brides is going to be explosive.  40+ yr old American women better watch out.  Because that is what really matters.  

[atomheartbevo 89301]

20 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Compare that to Ukraine. Russia is implementing a war of conquest, plain and simple.

20 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

Ukraine is considered a historic mistake. That's the Russian position.

20 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

This is the equivalent of a religious war for Russia. Plain and simple.

It's extremely important for one person:  Vladimir Putin.  

Your typical Russians clearly do not give a shit about it, especially since they were told it would be over within weeks.  Otherwise they wouldn't be pulling people off of streets or from their workplaces back in Russia to fill out the ranks, or forcing Russians to charge Ukrainian positions or risk being shot by their own people.   Or hell, emptying out Russian prisons for Putin's personal PMC. That speaks volumes about how desperate the Russian leadership is.

The fact that the Russian mouthpieces keep changing their messages speaks volumes about how the Russian people don't buy it because the Russian mouthpieces have tried to sell them on a continuous stream of bullshit from "Nazis" (not the German Nazi kind either) to NATO being on their border and wanting to attack to Ukraine will attack Russia if they don't demilitarize them, etc. The fact that they keep looking around for reasons for this war shows that it's not resonating with the Russian people.

The Russian government has not been able to find a single reason that resonates with the Russian people, which is also why they are jailing people who speak out against the war.  If the war was popular, those protestors would be shunned and ignored, but instead they are treated as enemies of the state.

20 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I don't agree that quantity no longer has quality, especially considering if not for the West, Russia would have quality and quantity. In everything. With a much greater means of producing more. 

On the modern battlefield it matters, especially with precise artillery and HIMARS that prevent a massive buildup of troops in any one area.  Russians are constantly under some kind of surveillance, from satellite down to some dude with a drone.  We have the video proof.

Also, if they are rushing masses of people across fields without tanks or APCs or IFVs, then those troops will not be able to hold any ground they attack.

20 minutes ago, SL Xpress said:

I will say, however, that it's important the West has some kind of sense of urgency about Ukraine's success. For a variety of reasons. 

Absolutely, with the top reasons being the two I mentioned - Russia won't stop at Ukraine, and Russia would control nearly a third of the world's wheat/corn supplies.

Edited February 16, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[JesusSweatDuck 17780]

1 hour ago, Nivek said:

My guess is that the US is playing for the long game here.  Their army is in ruins, their soldiers are now made up largely of conscripts and convicts, and they have a WW1 European General's regard for the common man.    If Russia keeps losing this war, losing men, and wrecking their economy, then they are going to recreate a situation where revolution can get going.  

And of course, the market for mail-order brides is going to be explosive.  40+ yr old American women better watch out.  Because that is what really matters.  

I've let my wife know that she better start giving me BJs on the reg, or Russian will replace her

 

*No I didn't really do that. I'd prefer to not be murdered in my sleep 

[Dahobbs 17394]

9 minutes ago, JesusSweatDuck said:

I've let my wife know that she better start giving me BJs on the reg, or Russian will replace her

 

*No I didn't really do that. I'd prefer to not be murdered in my sleep 

She'd wait until you were sleeping? Seems unlikely. 

[BamaATL 16592]

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/ukraine-bought-all-the-gas-trucks-available-in-europe-to-keep-fueled

 

Interesting, and very forward thinking by the Ukrainians and I presume Western Intel.  Also, in order to perform an offensive in modern war, fuel is sort of important.  Thanks for reinforcing that notion russia! 

[Sawbonz 27257]

2 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

Let's talk about all the ways Russia in Ukraine is different than the US in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan was a war of vengeance, plain and simple. The US fucked up the occupations of both Afghanistan and Iraq so badly, it's hard to know where to begin. But what I'd start with is implementing a representative government. That's only the beginning, though. Not enough soldiers to fulfill an occupation. More weight given to what contractors wanted to provide than what communities actually needed. No holistic understanding of tribal conflicts and historic grievances. Not that everyone was ignorant of them, but many of the decision makers didn't care. Frankly, shunting resources to prosecute the war in Iraq wasn't a huge help, either. 

In any case, the US didn't want to actually take over either country. They certainly didn't give a shit about the resources in Afghanistan.

Compare that to Ukraine. Russia is implementing a war of conquest, plain and simple. Even now they are in the process of attempting to eradicate the Ukrainian culture and identity in the occupied areas. The destruction of any written material in Ukrainian. The elimination of any cultural iconography that's not related to Russia, Russian, or the Russian Orthodox Church. The school system is being subsumed as an element of the state and cultural brainwashing even more overtly than is usually the case. 

Ukraine is considered a historic mistake. That's the Russian position. Did the US consider Afghanistan or Afghani people a mistake? I don't believe they even considered the Taliban a mistake, as much as they didn't want them taking power. 

As long as the West keeps providing arms, I'm sure Ukraine will hold out just fine for the reasons you're stating. But if the west had given Ukraine the same amount of support they did after Russia took over Crimea and instigated the takeover in the Donbas, Ukraine would be positively fucked right now. 

I don't agree that quantity no longer has quality, especially considering if not for the West, Russia would have quality and quantity. In everything. With a much greater means of producing more. 

I'll also point out that Iran fought Iraq to a standstill and by many measures actually won that war by doing exactly what you're suggesting can't be done any more. 

This is the equivalent of a religious war for Russia. Plain and simple. Sure, it's being driven by the man at the top, but the message resonates with a significant part of the populace. Certainly way more than a simple majority. If Putin lives and the West stops helping Ukraine to a significant degree, Russia would make significantly more progress than they're currently experiencing. 

I'm not predicting that's what will happen. I will say, however, that it's important the West has some kind of sense of urgency about Ukraine's success. For a variety of reasons. 

You should go back to posting on the basketball forum

[KYHorn 16751]

 

[KYHorn 16751]

 

 

 

[The Dog 43714]

14 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

 

 

 

with what army???

If Ukraine is able to retake Crimea there's nothing Russia can do about it.

This belief is a problem.

[Parliament 14083]

23 minutes ago, KYHorn said:

 

 

So the fuck what.

[atomheartbevo 89301]

9 minutes ago, The Dog said:

with what army???

If Ukraine is able to retake Crimea there's nothing Russia can do about it.

This belief is a problem.

What "Large-Scale Conventional response" does Russia have left? If they had one, shouldn't they have been using that already when they were beaten north of Kyiv, or at Kharkiv, or at Kherson (where it would have made a big difference in helping keep Crimea).

We know they had to slow down on artillery usage, both because they were using up barrels, but also having problems acquiring ammo, and getting the ammo to the battlefield.  We know they had to slow down on cruise missile usage, because the OSINT folks are tracking the hell out of components and showing that missiles are rolling off the production line and being fired at Ukraine shortly thereafter.

As for nukes, Putin is scared of a lot of things - COVID, assassination attempts (from within and without), the Russian people, etc.  No way he opens himself up to that, plus he knows China and India will stop trading with him. Or worse, China puts a bunch of troops on the Russian border, and Russia won't have shit opposing them other than Paul Blartarskovich, Border Cop.

When China, one of the few remaining countries that can help you out financially, tells you don't use nukes, you listen them.  Especially when their military is intact, larger, and they have a historical claim to Siberia just as much as Russia does over Crimea or Mexico over Texas.

Edited February 16, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[Scheiss Meister 8387]

If the supposition that 97% of Russia's army is in Ukraine is correct, some nations that border Russia might help Ukraine out by holding some exercises near said border.  Or Georgia start maneuvering as if they are going to go into North Ossetia.  Get Russia's attention and maybe get them to pull some troops out of Ukraine to counter.  

[atomheartbevo 89301]

3 minutes ago, Scheiss Meister said:

If the supposition that 97% of Russia's army is in Ukraine is correct, some nations that border Russia might help Ukraine out by holding some exercises near said border.  Or Georgia start maneuvering as if they are going to go into North Ossetia.  Get Russia's attention and maybe get them to pull some troops out of Ukraine to counter.  

Or wait until the Ukrainian counteroffensive(s) kick in this spring, at a moment when Russia is most vulnerable.  That would panic the hell out of the Russians.

[InkaUtexas 25270]

I like how you think. Time to run some NATO supported exercises in Georgia. 

[The Dog 43714]

ISW has been spot on this entire war:

 

9 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

I like how you think. Time to run some NATO supported exercises in Georgia. 

[Gatorubet 30011]

2 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

You should go back to posting on the basketball forum

meh.   i agree with him about the US is Iraq misadventure. I was very much against it at the time and I’m sad to say that I was very much right.

whether you agree with him or not, he certainly does not strike me as a troll. Having a different opinion is not grounds for a send off.

[The Dog 43714]

Posting all of this for convenience because General Hertling doesn't post this kind of content often: