Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rroff said:
I'm not sure Russia would win though - the US seems to be trying to maintain equilibrium - sure there are issues with training, maintenance and the logistics of hardware Ukraine isn't familiar with operating - but I often feel like the US is intentionally dragging this out, doing just enough to keep things in balance, so as to bleed Russia out.
Click to expand...

Yes I think US is happy to watch Russia hurt themselves trying to pick up the porcupine of Ukraine without gloves on.
 
alchal said:
Indeed

Mighty Russia is doing extremely well....said no one who's even remotely sane.
Click to expand...
You'll have to watch the video of the guy, I linked to it earlier. I was paraphrasing so may have got it wrong.

The point about winning the economic war is more about us suffering.
 
Superficial said:
An odd statement to make considering:

The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan after 10 years with a total of <15000 dead soldiers. It was an abject failure.

Current estimates by CIA/MI6 put a figure of >15000 dead Russians in Ukraine since February.

So how is it going as well as any successful invasion? lol
Click to expand...
As above, it's worth listening to the actual video if you want his actual opinion.

Regarding successful invasion, his point was that they've got control of supplies etc.
 
Superficial said:
An odd statement to make considering:

The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan after 10 years with a total of <15000 dead soldiers. It was an abject failure.

Current estimates by CIA/MI6 put a figure of >15000 dead Russians in Ukraine since February.

So how is it going as well as any successful invasion? lol
Click to expand...

Personally I'd consider a successful invasion in this day and age being a combined arms operation with massed air assets and minimum 100-200K troop spearhead backed up with at least another 300-500K taking the strategic locations within the first couple of months or so - not that many countries can roll that these days.

Things haven't moved that far on from WW2 really in the context of this war - previous sieges of Kyiv involved forces in the half million men ballpark - there is a good reason Russia pulled their ~37K, mostly light, forces back once they realised the initial impetus had failed.
 
Rroff said:
Personally I'd consider a successful invasion in this day and age being a combined arms operation with massed air assets and minimum 100-200K troop spearhead backed up with at least another 300-500K taking the strategic locations within the first couple of months or so - not that many countries can roll that these days.

Things haven't moved that far on from WW2 really in the context of this war - previous sieges of Kyiv involved forces in the half million men ballpark - there is a good reason Russia pulled their ~37K, mostly light, forces back once they realised the initial impetus had failed.
Click to expand...

I'd define one as keeping those "strategic locations" with minimum casualties whilst quelling resistance.

Russia has not achieved that and, judging by the facts, will not achieve that any time soon resulting in incredible numbers of Russian deaths the likes of which they have not seen in decades.

This is not a "successful invasion" simply because Russia mounted a large, coordinated attack with large numbers of troops and machinery - that is simplistic foolishness especially considering what we know about how they planned and operated their supply lines which were extremeley exposed and all against a much weaker nation.

This invasion was planned poorly and executed worse resulting in insane deaths.
 
NickK said:
I don’t think there will be any clear winner or looser

Putin wins in rearchitecting his income stream but trashes the economy. Ukraine becomes critically dependant on arms for debt but maintains border. EU has to find new energy and looses resources in africa but can sell tech later. Essentially putin is forcing countries to adapt technology in the long term.
China is busy thibking up ways to counter US intel with manhandling satellites into failure orbits using space drones. Faces challenges in production by india. Wins resources and tech to keep ahead of india.

All the conflict does is pushes up the level of debt - who owns more IOUs becomes the political winner?
Click to expand...
Ukrain are a resource rich, very resource rich country so it will ride out the financial debt without any real problems on that front.

Putins income stream is now the Brics and third world countries so he will lose out on the Wests money, and thats a lot of money.

Russians got a taste of the western way but they will now pay the price for Putins actions for a long time to come.

China has stayed out the war and although its a big Russian ally they will pick up a lot of trade that was normally Russian so they will be one of the economical winners in this conflict.

USA and China will be the ones with the biggest IOU's but Ukrain are indebted to all the NATO countries.

India is coming into it but I still think they are a decade or two behind. Every time I see India it still looks like a third world country to me

But whatever happens Russia is the biggest loser. If they win and take or occupy any of Ukrain the sanctions will never be lifted and they are out in the cold financially.

It will take decades if ever to replace the trade the west did with them. All those luxury cars and designer goods will only be available as knock offs from China.
 
bris said:
Ukrain are a resource rich, very resource rich country so it will ride out the financial debt without any real problems on that front.

Putins income stream is now the Brics and third world countries so he will lose out on the Wests money, and thats a lot of money.

Russians got a taste of the western way but they will now pay the price for Putins actions for a long time to come.

China has stayed out the war and although its a big Russian ally they will pick up a lot of trade that was normally Russian so they will be one of the economical winners in this conflict.

USA and China will be the ones with the biggest IOU's but Ukrain are indebted to all the NATO countries.

India is coming into it but I still think they are a decade or two behind. Every time I see India it still looks like a third world country to me

But whatever happens Russia is the biggest loser. If they win and take or occupy any of Ukrain the sanctions will never be lifted and they are out in the cold financially.

It will take decades if ever to replace the trade the west did with them. All those luxury cars and designer goods will only be available as knock offs from China.
Click to expand...
Or someone will assassinate Putin and we will have different outcomes.
 
Gregvivi0401 said:
Or someone will assassinate Putin and we will have different outcomes.
Click to expand...
There's no garrantee that killing Putin will result in a better outcome for Ukraine, there's plenty of people around Putin who would want to take over and are even more hardline when it comes to Russian nationalism then Putin is.
 
sigma said:
Recently listened to a podcast where an ex CIA agent was interviewed and he said Russia will win this, Ukraine isn't a significant asset to the West. And also whilst the West is 'helping' Ukraine all it is doing is selling weapons/saddling it with debt. The invasion is going as per any successful invasion, despite the earlier setbacks.

Russia doesn't needt to take over every city. As we all know this is clearly an economic war as much as it is boots on the ground. The end will be Ukraine staying as Ukraine but being controlled be Russia. An outcome accepted by all.

One person's view but an interesting one.
Click to expand...

OK I've listened to bits again, he says according to data (doesn't site sources or facts) Russia is winning currently and there's a 60-70% chance of Russia winning, the 20-30% chance of losing would be if there's an assassination or huge event like a nuke.

Again I'm just repeating his words but it's an interesting take/viewpoint.

Later (from memory) he goes on to say that the end of this conflict is probably more akin to an agreed ceasefire where everyone can claim to have won in their own way. He says Ukraine is a key agricultural requirement for Russia's future, as well as place where Russia has gas pipes, especially in the East, so they need it more than the West does.

I'd suggest watching the link if you think this is madness, rather than replying to me. These are not my opinions.
 
bris said:
It will take decades if ever to replace the trade the west did with them. All those luxury cars and designer goods will only be available as knock offs from China.
Click to expand...
I hate to point it out, but whatever the long term result in Ukraine, the Russian sanctions will not be in force in a decade, they would be lucky to still be in force in half a decade. Western governments/companies don't have much stomach for doing such things, hence why they watched Putin spend months organising an invasion of Ukraine, then delay it, then wait, then finally invade and all the time western governments did nothing to try and stop it aside from talk, then finally came in late with sanctions. The only reason western governments care about anything is because their voters happen to care about it at the time.

To put it into perspective, back in 2008 the US banking sector created a financial crisis that crippled their economy and sent shockwaves throughout the world, people were livid, millions lost their jobs/homes and when all was said and done, their government then used taxpayers funds to bail out the financial institutions who then used the money to pay themselves big bonuses and blame everything on poor people and immigrants, people got even more livid. But a couple of years later hardly anyone in the US really cared about it anymore because it was old news, that was their own economy and you think they're going to care enough about Ukraine in 5-10 years to make their government care?

And it's not just the Americans who lose interest, when did you last hear people talk about the Syrian civil war or see it on the news? How's Assad doing against ISIS and the western backed rebels? How's Libya doing right now? Last I heard it looked like it was gonna be the leading warlord versus Gaddafi's son in the run off for the presidency (that's not a joke in case anyone not up to date with Libya is wondering).

The west does not care about conflicts long term, prior to February Russia had been militarily occupying an area of Ukraine bigger than Wales since 2014 but nobody cared anymore, when I dared to suggest on here a week before the invasion that the west should start imposing sanctions in response to Putin preparing to invade a peaceful neighbour I got laughed down. Putin believes if he can keep things going until winter then the amount the west cares will once again decrease drastically, and the sad thing is he isn't wrong, Ukraine are in a race not just against Russia but against winter and eventually the time limit before the west tire of supporting a just war and become more interested in supporting a bad peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom