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

[Roar87]

Nope. Not as one sided as it was, but by 2:1 Ukrainians back fighting until the war is won.

Interesting article, I did note the areas where the actual fighting is happening tend to be closer to 50:50 or more in favour of negotiated peace.

Ukrainians' Views on Continuing the War With Russia, by Region

datawrapper.dwcdn.net

 

[Werewolf]

Russia need to use 9x the artillery shells because their artillery have fired too many rounds through the barrels without the proper maintenance, making them very very inaccurate, apparently barrel failure rates are off the charts, that’s why Ukrainian casualties aren’t as high.

And even when the barrels were "new" they were nowhere near as accurate as the Ukrainians have tended to be, in part because of old poorly maintained equipment, and in part because the Russians were sending out troops who had little or no training to run a lot of those artillery pieces, even very early on. To make even half competent use or artillery you need a fair old chunk of training, and even Russia's "trained" artillery personal were not up to western standard, let alone the conscripts and the reservists who hasn't touched a gun in 20 years.

Ukraine has been getting better guns, and better trained personal as the "special military operation" has gone on, Russia seems to have been pulling out antiques from behind a barn where they've sat rusting since WW2, and manning them with people who at best have had a rush course of how to fire the guns but not accurately aim them.

Interesting article, I did note the areas where the actual fighting is happening tend to be closer to 50:50 or more in favour of negotiated peace.

Ukrainians' Views on Continuing the War With Russia, by Region

datawrapper.dwcdn.net

You know what's surprising, that even in the parts of Ukraine where Russia has annexed, driven out, or kidnapped thousands of people including children that they're still at over 50% in favour of fighting back.
Given that those regions have been heavily depopulated with many of the people who could having fled to parts of Ukraine where they weren't likely to be raped, murdered, or taken away to "safety in Russia".
Meanwhile the areas of Ukraine where the free Ukrainians from those regions have tended to flee to are massively in support.

By your reasoning if France invaded the UK and got Scotland then invaded the border areas the rest of the UK should just give it up if those border areas after having been largely "cleansed" were not overwhelmingly in favour of fighting back.

 

[bjorkiii]

It baffles me why people still reply to it. I know how to keep the poster quiet.

 

[Roar87]

By your reasoning if France invaded the UK and got Scotland then invaded the border areas the rest of the UK should just give it up if those border areas after having been largely "cleansed" were not overwhelmingly in favour of fighting back.

I was thinking about this last night actually (not France invading), but in WW2 Churchill said we'd fight on the beaches and never surrender, I think the reality is that if the UK were in a similar position, either fighting the Wehrmacht in 1941 on British soil, or if we were on our own against Russia in 2023, we actually would also be forced to negotiate (probably surrender to Germany). That's just the reality. It doesn't mean I personally wouldn't sign up and fight and die, but the UK in both of those scenarios would simply be in an unwinnable position. It doesn't matter how much you dislike the outcome when logically it is the only viable option, at some point you do run out of able bodied people to fight. We do have nuclear weapons for a reason.

 

[StriderX]

I think the average Russian hates the West far more than any Ukrainian, most of them just want to get home in one piece. I think most Ukrainians at this stage would be happy to see an end to the fighting. Curious if there's any opinion polls on this but I suspect not.

Hate us but not our consumer goods apparently.

 

[RossGReds]

I was thinking about this last night actually (not France invading), but in WW2 Churchill said we'd fight on the beaches and never surrender, I think the reality is that if the UK were in a similar position, either fighting the Wehrmacht in 1941 on British soil, or if we were on our own against Russia in 2023, we actually would also be forced to negotiate (probably surrender to Germany). That's just the reality. It doesn't mean I personally wouldn't sign up and fight and die, but the UK in both of those scenarios would simply be in an unwinnable position. It doesn't matter how much you dislike the outcome when logically it is the only viable option, at some point you do run out of able bodied people to fight. We do have nuclear weapons for a reason.

We played to our strengths during those times; navy and air force. Maybe if we shared a land border with Germany we would've been better prepared than the French for a ground invasion.

 

[Allnamestaken]

Wtf is this trollop?

I think most of you genuinely think you give a ****, but what you care about is defeating Putin, not what's best for Ukraine.

LMAO.

 

[ubersonic]

I expect this war will be over in 12 months at this rate. What a waste of young men.

Well there's a chance you may be right, just not in the way you expect.

 

[ubersonic]

You have 20 men, I have 50 men. You lose 10 men, I lose 20 men. You now have 10 men, I have 30. Who is winning?

A superlative point, sir. With just two minor flaws:

(1) Ukraine are not fighting the USSR they are fighting the Russian Federation, an entity often referred too interchangeably with the former, however one with a significantly smaller population and armed forces. An accurate metric for this scenario is "You have 133 men, I have 400 men, you lose 10 men, I lose 30+ men, who is winning?", and the answer is Ukraine, Ukraine are winning the war of attrition.

(2) Ukraine are not fighting the USSR they are fighting the Russian Federation, an entity often referred too interchangeably with the former, however one with a significantly smaller population and armed forces. An accurate metric for this scenario is "You have 133 men, I have 400 men, you lose 10 men, I lose 30+ men, who is winning?" and the answer is Ukraine, Ukraine are winning the war of attrition.

Now I realise that technically speaking that's only one flaw but I thought that it was such a big one that it was worth mentioning twice.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

I think most of you genuinely think you give a ****, but what you care about is defeating Putin, not what's best for Ukraine.

Well to win they need to defeat Putin.

You think Ukraine losing great chucks of its country and people is good for Ukraine?

You think they'll feel safe in the years to come if Russia isn't defeated as it constantly threatens to further invade, causes political unrest in Ukraine, supplies arms and men for territorial incursions by "partisans"?

Just like from 2014 to 2022 they will just chip away at Ukraine while lying to the greater world that they don't have bad intensions towards Ukraine as a whole.

You continue to make the mistake of believing Putin can ever be taken at his word. I'm amazed how you think he can ever be trusted or that Ukraine should ever trust him. Ukraine won't be safe until it wins and hopefully joins the EU and NATO.

 

[Roar87]

A superlative point, sir. With just two minor flaws:

(1) Ukraine are not fighting the USSR they are fighting the Russian Federation, an entity often referred too interchangeably with the former, however one with a significantly smaller population and armed forces. An accurate metric for this scenario is "You have 133 men, I have 400 men, you lose 10 men, I lose 30+ men, who is winning?", and the answer is Ukraine, Ukraine are winning the war of attrition.

(2) Ukraine are not fighting the USSR they are fighting the Russian Federation, an entity often referred too interchangeably with the former, however one with a significantly smaller population and armed forces. An accurate metric for this scenario is "You have 133 men, I have 400 men, you lose 10 men, I lose 30+ men, who is winning?" and the answer is Ukraine, Ukraine are winning the war of attrition.

Now I realise that technically speaking that's only one flaw but I thought that it was such a big one that it was worth mentioning twice.

Extremely cringe doing a post in the style of Kryten, do you think you're the only person on a computer forum to watch Red Dwarf?
Not really sure why you're mentioning the USSR, I didn't, Russia still has 3x the population of Ukraine, who are absolutely not winning a war of attrition in anyone's eyes - literally no one would claim Ukraine is winning a war of attrition, or could win a war of attrition. They are fighting a World War 1 style war of attrition that is at a stale mate according to their own General.

 

[Roar87]

Well to win they need to defeat Putin.

You think Ukraine losing great chucks of its country and people is good for Ukraine?

No, it isn't good for anyone.

You think they'll feel safe in the years to come if Russia isn't defeated as it constantly threatens to further invade, causes political unrest in Ukraine, supplies arms and men for territorial incursions by "partisans"?

Well, I'd suggest both sides need to come to an agreement so they can live next to each other, because neither of them is going anywhere.

Just like from 2014 to 2022 they will just chip away at Ukraine while lying to the greater world that they don't have bad intensions towards Ukraine as a whole.

You continue to make the mistake of believing Putin can ever be taken at his word. I'm amazed how you think he can ever be trusted or that Ukraine should ever trust him. Ukraine won't be safe until it wins and hopefully joins the EU and NATO.

If Ukraine isn't capable of beating Russia, what should they do?

 

[supafly]

If Ukraine isn't capable of beating Russia, what should they do?

If Ukraine is not provided sufficient materiel to kick Russia out there will be another major European/World War not long afterwards. So you better start hoping they get the support to win and stop being a Russian sympathiser.

 

[ubersonic]

Extremely cringe doing a post in the style of Kryten, do you think you're the only person on a computer forum to watch Red Dwarf?

Judging by the amount of people who got the joke and liked the post, no

Not really sure why you're mentioning the USSR, I didn't, Russia still has 3x the population of Ukraine

Because you're post implied that Russia had the USSR levels of population in order to sustain the lobsided losses and still achieve victory in the long run, it doesn't.

It can't keep this up indefinitely, either Putin will have to call it quits (and probably lose his job) or he will fall out a window.

The amount of lives being lost on both sides is saddening, but every one is Putin's fault. Saying Ukraine should appease Russia now "to save lives on both sides" is just as stupid as saying "it's okay boys, we've kicked the Germans out of France/Poland, lets ask Adolf if he wants to just end the war now so he can stay in power, keep Austria and Czechoslovakia, and we'll all go home, I don't foresee any negative outcomes".

 

[Tuppy_Glossop]

I wonder why the people of Ukraine keep fighting when @Roar87 thinks it isn't their best option.

 

[Grim5]

The irony, that if Ukranians listen to roar they'll end up just fighting not in Ukraine but in Poland or some other country.

Remember second class citizens are used by Putin to fight his wars of conquest, as we've seen in Ukraine - the people fighting in Ukraine are not Moscowvites but people from previously conquered states, including conscripted people from parts of Ukraine conquered in 2014 and therefore Ukranians will never be first class citizens in Russian society who get to enjoy a better life. They were not first class under the Soviets and they won't be under Putin either, by giving in to Putin now they will just trade one war for another

 

[ubersonic]

They were not first class under the Soviets and they won't be under Putin either, by giving in to Putin now they will just trade one war for another

Actually Ukrainians were first class citizens in the USSR, or at least no worse off than the Russians were (post Stalin anyway). The idea that they were the bums of the USSR is just Russian revisionist propaganda.

Hence why most of the USSR's greatest technological and human achievements were by Ukrainians, the Antonov An-225 plane, the T-64 tank (and by extension the T-80 tank), the SS-18 Satan ICBM, the Kuznetsov class aircraft carriers (and Kiev class, and Ulyanovsk class), the Slava class cruisers (including the late Moskva), he first splitting of the atom in the USSR, the first computers constructed in the USSR, etc.

In fact Ukrainian war hero Leonid Brezhnev served as leader of the USSR for far longer than any Russian did. These days the Russians like to pretend that Soviet Ukraine was just a poor SSR they bankrolled back in the day but it's about as accurate as their portrayal of the cold war as a Russian victory (yes that's a thing).

 

[Rroff]

The irony, that if Ukranians listen to roar they'll end up just fighting not in Ukraine but in Poland or some other country.

Remember second class citizens are used by Putin to fight his wars of conquest, as we've seen in Ukraine - the people fighting in Ukraine are not Moscowvites but people from previously conquered states, including conscripted people from parts of Ukraine conquered in 2014 and therefore Ukranians will never be first class citizens in Russian society who get to enjoy a better life. They were not first class under the Soviets and they won't be under Putin either, by giving in to Putin now they will just trade one war for another

Something I think a lot of people don't realise - if Ukraine had just rolled over that would have given Putin millions more men and Ukraine's considerable defence industry to play with.

If Ukraine is not provided sufficient materiel to kick Russia out there will be another major European/World War not long afterwards. So you better start hoping they get the support to win and stop being a Russian sympathiser.

Dunno about not long after but something Roar87 seems to be, intentionally likely, ignoring is that Russia has spent considerable effort over the last few years seeding subversion in many countries but especially eastern European ones like Hungary and Slovakia and so on, pushing pro-Russian elements into politics or even government, etc.

My guess is the intention was when Ukraine fell to use it as a staging area to put pressure on those countries accessible via Ukraine to flip them using a mixture of troops built up on their border and pro-Russian elements within the country in positions to influence politics. Then once they had an inroad in that part of Europe to turn to the Baltics and try and replay things there in some way - in the early days of this war it came out they had plans (granted most countries will have all kinds of military plans as a contingency) to seize Gotland by force and install S-400 installations there so as to keep NATO at bay - which is when the situation becomes extremely sticky with potential for a NATO vs Russia clash or worse.

 

[Roar87]

Dunno about not long after but something Roar87 seems to be, intentionally likely, ignoring is that Russia has spent considerable effort over the last few years seeding subversion in many countries but especially eastern European ones like Hungary and Slovakia and so on, pushing pro-Russian elements into politics or even government, etc.

Lol intentionally?

I sat and watched, I think it was a BBC doc, about how Russia spreads propaganda throughout Eastern European countries, I never denied any of this. The EU also does the same thing, they're just more subtle about it and less devious with their intentions, but their goal is to still to promote themselves and spread pro-EU messaging.

 

[Sankari]

Absolute scenes in Kyiv right now.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1723065443835908247