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

[Owenb]

I think the question of Taurus answers itself if Russia escalate again.

Taurus/Atacmus will make next to near no difference. What can it do that stormshadow cannot? Take down a symbolic bridge linking Crimea to Russia? It has no value without being able to cut the land which Ukraine has no hope of doing.

The stupidity of the EU countries knows no limits. We will end up paying hundreds of billions to house 20 million Ukrainian refugees annually because we were too short sighted to spend a few billion to ramp up production of ammunition.

 

[Roar87]

Taurus/Atacmus will make next to near no difference. What can it do that stormshadow cannot? Take down a symbolic bridge linking Crimea to Russia? It has no value without being able to cut the land which Ukraine has no hope of doing.

The stupidity of the EU countries knows no limits. We will end up paying hundreds of billions to house 20 million Ukrainian refugees annually because we were too short sighted to spend a few billion to ramp up production of ammunition.

Ukraine doesn't have the man power, even if Europe matched Russia in ammunition - which it can't - Ukraine would still lose just based on numbers. The stupidity was in not negotiating at the start of the war, many lives would've been saved, that's on Zelensky/Johnson.

 

[jigger]

Taurus/Atacmus will make next to near no difference. What can it do that stormshadow cannot? Take down a symbolic bridge linking Crimea to Russia? It has no value without being able to cut the land which Ukraine has no hope of doing.

The stupidity of the EU countries knows no limits. We will end up paying hundreds of billions to house 20 million Ukrainian refugees annually because we were too short sighted to spend a few billion to ramp up production of ammunition.

Taurus can take out all sorts of targets Storm Shadow/SCALP can’t. The bridge is an interesting one. Cutting it means Russia have a very limited ferry service now it’s down to a single landing ship.

 

[Rroff]

Ukraine doesn't have the man power, even if Europe matched Russia in ammunition - which it can't - Ukraine would still lose just based on numbers. The stupidity was in not negotiating at the start of the war, many lives would've been saved, that's on Zelensky/Johnson.

Negotiate what exactly? if you bother watching the entire segment of the video which you linked the negotiators said it was plain they could not trust Russia and that all they wanted was to weaken Ukraine's hand to make it easier for Russia to take the country.

All Russian negotiations have quite transparently been attempts to game the situation on the battlefield and weaken Ukraine's ability to fight back - there is no happily ever after here.

Ukraine supplied with adequate amounts of ammo and able to utilise more advanced Western systems absolutely has the potential to make things untenable for Russia in Ukraine, though that window is closing as there will be a point manpower is an issue even if the West does get its act together belatedly.

 

[alchal]

Ukraine doesn't have the man power, even if Europe matched Russia in ammunition - which it can't - Ukraine would still lose just based on numbers. The stupidity was in not negotiating at the start of the war, many lives would've been saved, that's on Zelensky/Johnson.

.
Oh jeez.

Going by your vatnik logic we should have steamrolled the Taliban, Iraq would have smashed the coalition and Vietnam would never have become communist.

Do you know military history?..

Or did you read vatniks 101 history, Russia mighty, Russia strong, Russia wins ?

I mean...with such manpower they should have been looking to take Ukraine in three days ..eh.

 

[Drukk]

So it looks like East beats West after all, north Korea, Iran, Russia get what they want. The west sits idly by and looses it all. So much for America being the world's biggest superpower, they can't even sort out their own internal squabbles. America is going to come out of this a weakened and lessor state, countries that were wary of them now see them as a country in turmoil who can't commit to anything.

 

[Roar87]

Negotiate what exactly? if you bother watching the entire segment of the video which you linked the negotiators said it was plain they could not trust Russia and that all they wanted was to weaken Ukraine's hand to make it easier for Russia to take the country.

That was perhaps their opinion. They decided to continue fighting a war to avoid the risk of Russia going back on their agreement and er, fighting a war...? Which they are doing anyway. That logic makes no sense to me. They carried on fighting because they expected to win, which they were clearly poorly advised about.

All Russian negotiations have quite transparently been attempts to game the situation on the battlefield and weaken Ukraine's ability to fight back - there is no happily ever after here.

Yeah I just don't agree, Russia have plainly stated their demands, both before and during the war, which is primarily around Ukraine joining NATO.

Ukraine supplied with adequate amounts of ammo and able to utilise more advanced Western systems absolutely has the potential to make things untenable for Russia in Ukraine, though that window is closing as there will be a point manpower is an issue even if the West does get its act together belatedly.

Ukraine had this over the summer and barely made any progress. The only way they could win is if the US Army came and fought this war for them.

 

[Rroff]

That was perhaps their opinion. They decided to continue fighting a war to avoid the risk of Russia going back on their agreement and er, fighting a war...? Which they are doing anyway. That logic makes no sense to me. They carried on fighting because they expected to win, which they were clearly poorly advised about.

You only have to look at the latest set of demands from Russia to see their opinion was exactly the right one... as before there was no happy ever after even if they agreed to Russia's demands, they are quite transparently just a means of getting what they want and that still ends in misery for the Ukrainian people.

Ukraine had this over the summer and barely made any progress. The only way they could win is if the US Army came and fought this war for them.

They've never been full equipped with the amount of systems and ammo, sufficient air-defences, etc. for the job with lots of dragging of feet.

 

[alchal]

That was perhaps their opinion. They decided to continue fighting a war to avoid the risk of Russia going back on their agreement and er, fighting a war...? Which they are doing anyway. That logic makes no sense to me. They carried on fighting because they expected to win, which they were clearly poorly advised about.



Yeah I just don't agree, Russia have plainly stated their demands, both before and during the war, which is primarily around Ukraine joining NATO.



Ukraine had this over the summer and barely made any progress. The only way they could win is if the US Army came and fought this war for them.

They carried on fighting to avoid getting killed and raped and murdered, you name it.

It's simple.

Lol at NATO expansion...just lol.

Also Ukraine ,had it received support in time would have defeated Russia.

 

[supafly]

Turns out it's better to have Iran and North Korea for allies in a war than USA and West Europe. In the last year NK has delivered 2 million 152mm shells to Russia, while Europe has send 300K 155mm shells to Ukraine.

Just as UK announced new sanctions, the news came out that Iran has send 400 ballistic missiles to Russia...

Iran sends Russia 400 ‘highly accurate’ ballistic missiles​

Rockets can pinpoint targets 435 miles away in escalation of military cooperation between the two US-sanctioned countries

While our bunch of muppets are taking part in a pantomime debate that the Israeli's will just stick two fingers up to like they did to Biden anyway, Russia and it's allies continue on with serious business.

 

[fastwunz]

I think Roar has a point here. Russia can replace their losses easily - most are saying 30k fresh troops can be mobilised per month. Ukraine can’t.

UA Intel Chief: Russia Can Mobilize 30k Troops a Month!

Tackle Whatever the Day Throws at You With 90mg of Caffeine and Zero Sugar in Every Piece https://strikegum.com/Get the essential National Security News FREE...

youtu.be

It’s just counting. It may be an uncomfortable truth but a truth none the less.

This war ends with some sort of negotiation. It won’t end with one side gaining a total military victory. History shows us that a total military victory is a rare thing.

 

[Roar87]

I think Roar has a point here. Russia can replace their losses easily - most are saying 30k fresh troops can be mobilised per month. Ukraine can’t.

UA Intel Chief: Russia Can Mobilize 30k Troops a Month!

Tackle Whatever the Day Throws at You With 90mg of Caffeine and Zero Sugar in Every Piece https://strikegum.com/Get the essential National Security News FREE...

youtu.be

It’s just counting. It may be an uncomfortable truth but a truth none the less.

This war ends with some sort of negotiation. It won’t end with one side gaining a total military victory. History shows us that a total military victory is a rare thing.

Yeah I don't think Russia can occupy most of Ukraine, nor would they want to do that.

 

[Rroff]

Yeah I don't think Russia can occupy most of Ukraine, nor would they want to do that.

You did watch the Carlson Putin interview right? the one where Putin spent 2 hours laying the basis of why Ukraine doesn't exist and Russia is just taking back what belongs to them... as in all of it...

 

[dowie]

I think Roar has a point here. Russia can replace their losses easily - most are saying 30k fresh troops can be mobilised per month. Ukraine can’t.

[...]

It’s just counting. It may be an uncomfortable truth but a truth none the less.

This war ends with some sort of negotiation. It won’t end with one side gaining a total military victory. History shows us that a total military victory is a rare thing.

No, it doesn't, just look at conflicts the UK was involved in last century and the early parts of this century: see WW1, WW2. Or indeed see the Gulf War part 1 and 2, the intervention in Kosovo, the intervention in Sierra Leone, the Falklands Conflict, the Malayan Emergency, the Dhofar War.

With Afghanistan there was also a quick military victory but then an ongoing insurgency, with Ukraine that's obviously very different as they are the native population.

I'm not sure either side can easily replace losses, Russia has avoided full mobilisation and doesn't send conscripts (save for some of those sent at the beginning), it's reliant on ex-regulars/reservists, mercenaries, volunteers from prisons etc. Granted conscripts do get some reserve status after conscription though Putin will still want to avoid calling up young guys from Moscow and St Petersburg.

Whether or not this war ends in military victory (either way) is in large part dependent on Western countries and the amount of military support sent, going for a negotiated settlement, letting Putin save face etc.. is something that it seems the Biden administration would like to see at the expense of Ukranian lives in return for perhaps reducing uncertainty of a chaotic handover in Russia and/or after being spooked by the nuclear threats.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

You did watch the Carlson Putin interview right? the one where Putin spent 2 hours laying the basis of why Ukraine doesn't exist and Russia is just taking back what belongs to them... as in all of it...

He either didn't or he simply heard what he wanted to hear. Its amazing how he can type that Putin doesn't want all of Ukraine when that is exactly what he tried to do in the first week but they failed. If Ukraine put down their arms now Putin would push to Kiev and take the whole country. Roar is a text book example of why propaganda, in this case Russian propaganda, works, he's bought it hook line and sinker.

 

[bingham67]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760395087966515540

Bang bang its bad to be hanging around as Russian soldiers lately

 

[Quartz]

Kleptocracy is perfectly compatible with captalism.

Actually, no it isn't. Capitalism depends upon the rule of law.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1759998704159781259

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Actually, no it isn't. Capitalism depends upon the rule of law.

Does it? No you can't have a situation with no law and order at all but politicians and rich industrialists robbing the state is compatible with capitalism.

 

[bingham67]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1760415222915887227