Jump to content

Русский корабль - иди нахуй

Eastwood

By Eastwood
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 86.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • atomheartbevo

    8668

  • MillerEP

    7334

  • Schulz2.0

    3660

  • InkaUtexas

    3054

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

AUS-97HORN
AUS-97HORN

For the love of Christ woman,  stop posting the same fucking thing every 20 mins just to make your neurotic self feel better.     Bring something useful to the thread other than your inane babbli

closetohumping
closetohumping
InkaUtexas
InkaUtexas

I volunteered today. Log/Admin role to replace people for 30-60 days. The operation is in the west, or should the Orcs win will be pulled back behind the NATO wall. Either way the humanitarian effort

Posted Images

atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90,655

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Von Clausewitz said:

About what? It being a good bet? Probably still is. 

The numbers are the numbers. 

608.  That's a number that you should ponder.  608 days for a simple Special Military Operation that would remove Zelenskyy from power and have Russians in Kyiv in a few days or weeks.

2 hours ago, AUS-97HORN said:

Now, in a war situation, Russia will toss as many of them in as can possibly stand up, but still.  even if we assumed 15% of the 17M Russian males could technically serve.  Thats only 2.55M healthy enough Russian men who could serve country-wide if they fully mobilized and gave all available jobs to women.  With another  3M age 35-50 meatbag fodder available to die and not do much else.

And that's ignoring the 700,000 - 1 million+ that fled a year ago.  Most of those guys were probably within the military age range, which is why they fled, and they had the means to do so, which means they weren't your typical Russian peasants from the outer regions.

 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90,655

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Von Clausewitz said:

The numbers are the numbers. 

And since you love numbers.

  • United States population in the late 1960s: 200 million people.
  • North Vietnam's population in 1968: 19 million people

Now the North Vietnamese had a massive pool of men to draw from - 2.8 million males eligible for military service between the ages 17-35

But the United States had more than 3.5 million personnel on active duty in 1968, with well over 500,000 actually in Vietnam (and hundreds of thousands more supporting those troops whether it be air raids or whatever).

In 1968, at our peak, in Vietnam:

  • US Forces: 536,000
  • South Vietnam: 820,000
  • South Korea: 50,000
  • Australia: 7,600
  • Thailand: 6,000
  • New Zealand: 500
  • Total: 1.42 million+

In 1968, North Vietnam had:

  • The People's Army of (North) Vietnam and Viet Cong: 420,000

Now you can do the math and tell us the difference between 200 million people and 19 million people, and 1.42 million troops and 420,000 troops.

And you can say "well, we were fighting halfway around the world" and I'd point out that South Vietnam had nearly double the troops of the NVA and VC on its own.

And that's just one example - recent history has plenty of instances where somebody with superior numbers tangled with another nation and it still didn't work out for them.  Shit, Israel hasn't fought a major war since its founding where it wasn't outnumbered and it still came out on top, and here in 2023 they still only have 9.3 million people.

I know you believe that Russia can just grind out a win, but if they can't do it in 608 days, I don't know why you think they can do it in 1,200 days.  Even if we scaled back support, Russia still won't have the manpower to take and hold anything outside of what they already had in 2014, and they are hell-bent on killing their soldiers anyways.

It's all about the size of the fight in the dog, not the size of the dog in the fight.  Ukraine is far more motivated than Russia, and Putin has made it clear he intends to commit full-on genocide against Ukraine, so Ukraine has no choice.

 

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90,655

Posted
Posted

And I would add - the US fought like fucking crazy in Vietnam, and we dominated them in so many battles.

But their troops and population were willing to suck it up and outlast us, just as Ukraine is willing to suck it up and outlast Russia, and for all of our population, we didn't have enough troops to just start rolling up and taking and holding huge chunks of Vietnam.  Russia is in even worse shape - they aren't able to effectively move troops around quickly and in large numbers like we did with our air assault groups and their helicopters.

And Russia is not dominating Ukraine - hell, it took Russia 8-9 months to take a city the size of San Marcos that was closer to the Russian border than Houston is to Austin.  And it broke multiple Russian units, including leading to the eventual demise of their best unit - Wagner.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SL Xpress

SL Xpress 7,609

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

And since you love numbers.

  • United States population in the late 1960s: 200 million people.
  • North Vietnam's population in 1968: 19 million people

Now the North Vietnamese had a massive pool of men to draw from - 2.8 million males eligible for military service between the ages 17-35

But the United States had more than 3.5 million personnel on active duty in 1968, with well over 500,000 actually in Vietnam (and hundreds of thousands more supporting those troops whether it be air raids or whatever).

In 1968, at our peak, in Vietnam:

  • US Forces: 536,000
  • South Vietnam: 820,000
  • South Korea: 50,000
  • Australia: 7,600
  • Thailand: 6,000
  • New Zealand: 500
  • Total: 1.42 million+

In 1968, North Vietnam had:

  • The People's Army of (North) Vietnam and Viet Cong: 420,000

Now you can do the math and tell us the difference between 200 million people and 19 million people, and 1.42 million troops and 420,000 troops.

And you can say "well, we were fighting halfway around the world" and I'd point out that South Vietnam had nearly double the troops of the NVA and VC on its own.

And that's just one example - recent history has plenty of instances where somebody with superior numbers tangled with another nation and it still didn't work out for them.  Shit, Israel hasn't fought a major war since its founding where it wasn't outnumbered and it still came out on top, and here in 2023 they still only have 9.3 million people.

I know you believe that Russia can just grind out a win, but if they can't do it in 608 days, I don't know why you think they can do it in 1,200 days.  Even if we scaled back support, Russia still won't have the manpower to take and hold anything outside of what they already had in 2014, and they are hell-bent on killing their soldiers anyways.

It's all about the size of the fight in the dog, not the size of the dog in the fight.  Ukraine is far more motivated than Russia, and Putin has made it clear he intends to commit full-on genocide against Ukraine, so Ukraine has no choice.

 

 

That seems like a bad example. It doesn't make any sense to go into a detailed critique of the US prosecution of that war, other than to summarize it as McNamara was an idiot. Smart man, but an idiot. He was an idiot at Ford and he was an idiot as Defense Secretary.

What I will say, and you've said it many times, is that Russia does not look like it can successfully prosecute an attack any more. It felt at the time like Bakhmut was their last hurrah in that area, and nothing since then has made me think anything differently. What would change that is if Western resolve to keep supplying Ukrainian troops with arms and ammunition faltered (Mike Johnson, I'm looking directly at you). But the Russian army's ability to prosecute a large scale war is severely lacking. It was shockingly lacking at the start of the war, and its abilities have been severely degraded since then. Never mind their ability to supply their troops with the equipment necessary for a combined arms attack in any phase. Their training infrastructure is decimated. They have no ability to even teach new formations how to properly conduct war. Combine that with the fact competency is not the priority. Not being a threat to the state is the priority. Which means the chain of command is full of yes men whose path to promotion has to include how adept they are at successfully finding scapegoats. 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
956 Worldwide

956 Worldwide 35,597

Posted
Posted

@SL Xpress is right, the overall Russian demographics do not matter near as much as Russia’s ability to train, equip, and integrate these numbers into useful formations. That ability has been heavily degraded by ongoing combat, sanctions, and most importantly long-term structural deficiencies and lack of state capacity where it counts. Ukraine is comparatively better because they are reliant on Western capacity to backstop their own. 
 

«У нас много» does not work in an offensive war in the 21st century. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
B00M

B00M 6,734

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, AUS-97HORN said:

we already pulled the Russian demographic numbers multiple times on this thread, hell it was talked about even before Feb 22. 

Russia doesnt have enough "real" military age men to outlast Ukraine.  by real, I mean 17-35. after 35 the Russian males fitness ability falls off a cliff. which is why we keep seeing pics of pot-bellied 50 year olds who cant fucking stand without a cane holding a rusted rifle.

Russian Age Range by gender

that site shows that there are only 17M Russian males between the age of 15-34. 

and this study showed that only 12% of Russian Males beween 18-27 were eligible to serve. and 60% of them were not accepted due to health reasons in 2011.

Now, in a war situation, Russia will toss as many of them in as can possibly stand up, but still.  even if we assumed 15% of the 17M Russian males could technically serve.  Thats only 2.55M healthy enough Russian men who could serve country-wide if they fully mobilized and gave all available jobs to women.  With another  3M age 35-50 meatbag fodder available to die and not do much else.

 

In the meantime, the least optimistic estimates are saying that Russia has lost at least 150k killed, and another 80k or so permanently wounded.   

Yes, a large number of those deaths are the 35-50yo meatbag fodder deaths from the conscription draft.

But that still tells you that probably somewhere in the range of 5% of all Militarily healthy Russian males have already been removed from the board.   And MOSCOW AND ST. PETE REALLY HAVENT BEEN TOUCHED.

Russia is no-bullshit running out of meatbags a fuckload faster than Ukraine is running out of eligible future fighters, plus Ukraine is letting women serve in active combat roles- something Russia is not doing.

 

Nice post. Minor correction at the very end, I saw video yesterday that Russia has started trying to pay women to get trained for 1-2 months then serve at the front. But it’s Russia, so they’re basically just field wives and victims too. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90,655

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

What I will say, and you've said it many times, is that Russia does not look like it can successfully prosecute an attack any more. It felt at the time like Bakhmut was their last hurrah in that area, and nothing since then has made me think anything differently.

2 hours ago, SL Xpress said:

But the Russian army's ability to prosecute a large scale war is severely lacking. It was shockingly lacking at the start of the war, and its abilities have been severely degraded since then. Never mind their ability to supply their troops with the equipment necessary for a combined arms attack in any phase. Their training infrastructure is decimated. They have no ability to even teach new formations how to properly conduct war. Combine that with the fact competency is not the priority. Not being a threat to the state is the priority. Which means the chain of command is full of yes men whose path to promotion has to include how adept they are at successfully finding scapegoats. 

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

@SL Xpress is right, the overall Russian demographics do not matter near as much as Russia’s ability to train, equip, and integrate these numbers into useful formations. That ability has been heavily degraded by ongoing combat, sanctions, and most importantly long-term structural deficiencies and lack of state capacity where it counts. Ukraine is comparatively better because they are reliant on Western capacity to backstop their own. 

We've got all of the documented Russian corruption that left vehicles without batteries, tires, hoses, etc. (that were sold on the black market) and that left Russian soldiers without proper uniforms.  Remember the missing 1.5 million winter uniforms that a Russian MP/lieutenant general bitched a lot about?  Putting all of that aside, there is a huge and very glaring reason for their problems to execute, and one we haven't experienced since WWII (and our NCO system made up for any such losses, while the Russian NCO system can't).

It's this:  They've lost the officers need to lead their men, particularly at the lower levels (platoons and companies where Shit Gets Done), and these are just 3,000 commissioned officers - I can't imagine how many NCOs they've lost. Russian NCOs are not nearly as professional and well-trained as Western NCOs are - in many cases, Russian NCOs are soldiers who were alive after a year, whereas in the West, NCOs can step up and temporarily lead a platoon and platoon commanders can step up and lead a company. 

And these are just the ones confirmed by Russian sources.  There's probably hundreds more missing.

Hell, they lost another Colonel last week, and somehow (because of his rank probably) his body was recovered quickly enough and sent back to Russia that they could hold an open-casket funeral.

Either he was the rare Russian officer that visited the front, or Ukrainian artillery reached into the rear far enough to hit a battalion or regimental CP.

Edited by atomheartbevo
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 90,655

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

I don't think those guys made it, here's one with a guy running on fire

 

Okay, he was literally on fire for a few seconds.  And those shockwaves starting at :08, oof.

This drone stuff, there's just no other way to describe than the Ukrainians are just hunting down Russian soldiers and vehicles.

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 49,510

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, vtaenz said:

The guy is new and has 4 posts all in this thread.

They'll be crowd sourced soon enough.

The real answer is that he's not new, he's the same fucking russian dick sucking troll who's infested this site for years, and @atomheartbevo should fucking know better than to even give him a forum for his bullshit. 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BamaATL

BamaATL 16,593

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

What did Slovakia give them? So the majority of NATO supports Ukraine, but they decide to say nope! Fuck em. 

The good news is that this wasn't unexpected, they had a election on part of the new governments policy points was winding down military aid to Ukraine.  The bad news is they elected a right wing nutter who appears to be attempting to follow the Orban playbook.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 106,922

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

The good news is that this wasn't unexpected, they had a election on part of the new governments policy points was winding down military aid to Ukraine.  The bad news is they elected a right wing nutter who appears to be attempting to follow the Orban playbook.  

Yeah, their recent election picked a full-on pro-Russia right wing nutbar government that is all in on being Orban II, Fascist Boogaloo.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rimbo

Rimbo 27,036

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, SydneyCarton said:

The real answer is that he's not new, he's the same fucking russian dick sucking troll who's infested this site for years, and @atomheartbevo should fucking know better than to even give him a forum for his bullshit. 

 

 

How dare you. How DARE you! What do you have against dick-sucking trolls that you would compare them to THAT guy?

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
27-25

27-25 2,085

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

If memory serves some old Soviet era helos, early on it might have been a few Migs.  

Yeah, I recall them giving up some Migs and in return Poland and a couple of other countries provided air coverage for them until they could get western planes in place.  So, you're welcome Slovakia!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Viper

Viper 12,221

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
55 minutes ago, MillerEP said:

Slovakia just had an election, this was their new government's first day on the job. The Prime Minister Fico ran on the platform of specifically ending support for Ukraine. He is a personal friend of Putin's.

 

^It says S400's not S300s. That's a typo.

 

 

83xu8o.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites
statsman

statsman 5,693

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, MillerEP said:

Slovakia just had an election, this was their new government's first day on the job. The Prime Minister Fico ran on the platform of specifically ending support for Ukraine. He is a personal friend of Putin's.

 

^It says S400's not S300s. That's a typo.

 

 

My workplace has a MSnews news feed from multiple sources. I don’t click on the sketchy ones like “Z News Live”. I noticed earlier today there was a blurb from them saying Russia destroyed an ATACMS. I didn’t click, and thought “either it’s true or it’s not. If it’s true, we’ll hear a lot more about it”. 
 
Thanks for the post, and is there a transcript of a translation?

Edited by statsman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...