I think that's a stupid argument. "It's not that much" is the same argument anyone can use when it comes to government spending. I know it's not that much. Giving illegals Medicaid is a very small percentage of actual Medicaid expenditures. Glad you would be ok with that.

It's totally ok you use that argument just be consistent.

I hope Ukraine wins. Us propping up them and also giving money for their social services, which we have done, isn't something I agree with.

Quote:

---

Exactly. You're basing your argument on something that has no example of happening in modern warfare.

---

And so are you. What we do have is some recent history. All our tech advantages did not secure Afghanistan did it?

How about Vietnam? Nope.

Nor will work here. Our tech cost a lot of money and their are also limits to how much we can produce.

It's kind of like the old Pixel flick, "Bugs life". LOL.

Neither Russia or China has been squeamish about wiping out or sacrificing significant portions of their people to gain their objectives and stay in power.

I am not Russia is noble either. They are not but neither is our gov either.

backintexas2013 said:

---

I think that's a stupid argument. "It's not that much" is the same argument anyone can use when it comes to government spending. I know it's not that much. Giving illegals Medicaid is a very small percentage of actual Medicaid expenditures. Glad you would be ok with that.

It's totally ok you use that argument just be consistent.

I hope Ukraine wins. Us propping up them and also giving money for their social services, which we have done, isn't something I agree with.

---

I think this is a good investment if we see it through. I don't think Medicaid for illegals is a good investment

Quote:

---

There is an idea of modern warfare that I do not agree with. Yes Tech and power is critical but in the long run you have to have boots on the ground to win and hold a territory.

---

And you don't get boots on the ground with just boots. You need to be light, quick, well equipped, own the skies, and be able to sustain and project logistically. Russia has and continues to struggle with those concepts. It's precisely why we ourselves have shifted from COIN to LSCO. Successful offensives require massive coordination and logistical ability. The Russians still haven't figured that out. It's just more bodies. And then they get obliterated by cheap drones and their rear support tactically taken out before they can sustain. It's why they move so slowly and gain virtually nothing. And with Ukraine now given the green light to strike what little logistical support they have behind the Russian border it's only going to be more difficult.

OPAG said:

---

Quote:

---

Exactly. You're basing your argument on something that has no example of happening in modern warfare.

---

And so are you. What we do have is some recent history. All our tech advantages did not secure Afghanistan did it?

How about Vietnam? Nope.

Nor will work here. Our tech cost a lot of money and their are also limits to how much we can produce.

It's kind of like the old Pixel flick, "Bugs life". LOL.

Neither Russia or China has been squeamish about wiping out or sacrificing significant portions of their people to gain their objectives and stay in power.

I am not Russia is noble either. They are not but neither is our gov either.

---

Vietnam was 55 years ago. It's not relevant at all to today. You also forgot about Iraq. A major land war that we won twice. And it was a complete bloodbath.

🇺🇦🇷🇺 Ukraine may lose Kharkov if it does not receive two Patriot air defense systems - Zelensky pic.twitter.com/c6RmhIT1o7

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) May 16, 2024

For all the bravado over here, Zelensky is worried about Russia's capabilities.

I don't think he is he just knows how to play the game. Dude is a great politician.

Quote:

---

Vietnam was 55 years ago. It's not relevant at all to today. You also forgot about Iraq. A major land war that we won twice. And it was a complete bloodbath.

---

And neither was Afghanistan, and how did that turn out.

Again, to think that Russia is a bunch of "neanderthals' would be a massive error that many have played and suffered huge consequences for it.

We do not have the stomach or history to play the long game UNLESS WE ARE ATTACKED. To equate Russia with Iraq is more delusional thinking.

Russian is fine with the way things are. Do you really think the Ukes are going to be able to go on the offensive and drive the Russian out? Really, Please. Not happening.

And if we try to send troops in to this, whomever tries to do that is committing suicide.

The Russians are not stupid, history proves this.

Again you have not addressed the schizophrenia. that we have here.

RUSSIA IS GOING TO OVERUN NATO, IF WE DON'T STOP THEM IN UKRAINE

RUSSIAN's ARE SO STUPID AND MILITARILY INCOMPETENT THAT CAN'T EVEN MOUNT AN EFFECTIVE OFFENSIVE AGAINST POOR UKRAINE!

You are also not dealing with UKE or West incompetence and corruption. You are being very myopic.

We definitely have a massive weapon advantage (AT THIS TIME) but those weapons are expensive and are not limitless and must be run and maintained by highly skilled and trained PEOPLE!

We have administration that is pretty much anti American.

Good points last night.

On the anti-American nature of this administration I would just note again my position is that the Biden family/administration is owned/operated by the CCP (who are themselves of course allies of Putin). Up the road in Georgia I think I put this on the thread/board earlier but note the attempt to maintain massive foreign influence there too, and threats to their leadership if they don't facilitate it:

The irony here is that a national reconciliation with Russia is probably the best way for the Georgians to actually protect their independence at this point. The Transnational Western Regime seems dead-set on using them as a military proxy against the Russians for a second time. https://t.co/jpOwRXvfQB

— Armchair Warlord (@ArmchairW) May 24, 2024

As a purely political matter Biden admin realizes it's a loser now and they can't push the glorious patriotic war for fascism further this year (notice a lot of the nafo propagandists went offline after October, and now even perpetua is 'retiring' as with so many other 'osint' propagandists):

They weren't kidding when insiders said that Biden's new policy post-aid package would be to downplay Ukraine and not mention it much anymore. They really want Ukraine "off the books" as the final stretch toward elections begins. https://t.co/QceBm5EKNx

— SIMPLICIUS Ѱ (@simpatico771) May 24, 2024

On strategy/updates it's sort of funny because the Russians are pretty direct in updating what they are doing/seeing:

Rybar Live: Special military operation, May 23
Mikhail Zvinchuk, head of the Russian think tank Rybar: «Fighting is underway in Kleshcheevka and in Andreevka, which according to certain reports have been completely liberated. However, so far there is no footage that confirms this… pic.twitter.com/eBaKOoVUum

— Rybar Force (@rybar_force) May 24, 2024

❗️ Two days ago, an AFU armoured group was hit at a crossing together with a pontoon, and the equipment was destroyed. However, the infantry, albeit partially, reached the development to the north.

🔻 Very contradictory information about the Volvhansk machinery engineering plant…

— Rybar Force (@rybar_force) May 23, 2024

nortex97 said:

---

As a purely political matter Biden admin realizes it's a loser now and they can't push the glorious patriotic war for fascism further this year (notice a lot of the nafo propagandists went offline after October, and now even perpetua is 'retiring' as with so many other 'osint' propagandists):

---

I have also seen this trend.

Rip king pic.twitter.com/onBIT4RulI

— ayden (@squatsons) May 24, 2024

Quote:

---

Russian is fine with the way things are.

---

Their carousel of generals and military staff says otherwise.

Quote:

---

he Russians are not stupid, history proves this.

---

What history? You keep saying this but by your own admission you said they haven't been in a major engagement in the last 50 years.

This is some major league spin. LOL


You have still not answered the schizophrenia or Stupid Russians that can't fight their way out of wet paper back.

and Super hype Russia that is going take over all of NATO!

We will just see how things go.

OPAG said:

---

This is some major league spin. LOL


You have still not answered the schizophrenia or Stupid Russians that can't fight their way out of wet paper back.

and Super hype Russia that is going take over all of NATO!

We will just see how things go.

---

Has Tesla ever said anything like that?

Ag with kids said:

---

OPAG said:

---

This is some major league spin. LOL


You have still not answered the schizophrenia or Stupid Russians that can't fight their way out of wet paper back.

and Super hype Russia that is going take over all of NATO!

We will just see how things go.

---

Has Tesla ever said anything like that?

---

Only almost daily for 226 pages now. Where have you been?

Ag with kids said:

---

OPAG said:

---

This is some major league spin. LOL


You have still not answered the schizophrenia or Stupid Russians that can't fight their way out of wet paper back.

and Super hype Russia that is going take over all of NATO!

We will just see how things go.

---

Has Tesla ever said anything like that?

---

No, I have never made the argument that Russia is a threat to take over NATO. It's pure projection of other's arguments on to myself.

Teslag said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

OPAG said:

---

This is some major league spin. LOL


You have still not answered the schizophrenia or Stupid Russians that can't fight their way out of wet paper back.

and Super hype Russia that is going take over all of NATO!

We will just see how things go.

---

Has Tesla ever said anything like that?

---

No, I have never made the argument that Russia is a threat to take over NATO. It's pure projection of other's arguments on to myself.

---

You've directly made the argument the war isn't a defensive one but rather an opportunity to use Ukraine as a proxy to attack Russia. And of course voiced concern about them taking Moldova/baltic states next ( nato members). There are also other posters (not gonna go document it) who have repeatedly exclaimed Poland would be at risk next if "Russia wins."

Your hatred of Russia and Russians ("stack russian bodies") is thoroughly documented, but at least part of it logically is rooted I assume in a fear of what they will do next. But that's my assumption of rational thinking.

Moreover, if we aren't worried about Russia taking/invading a nato country next...what again is the American interest in propping up the fascist Kiev regime? Hint: there is none. Our interests would be perfectly fine if Kiev is run by Moscow again, and energy/food prices globally would drop quickly.

And not one single link of yours did I ever say that they were a threat to NATO. What they want to do and what they can do are two completely different things.

Quote:

---

Moreover, if we aren't worried about Russia taking/invading a nato country next...what again is the American interest in propping up the fascist Kiev regime? Hint: there is none. Our interests would be perfectly fine if Kiev is run by Moscow again, and energy/food prices globally would drop quickly.

---

Again, our interest is the ability to harm and neuter one of our adversaries for pennies on the dollar and weaken them. And Russia today is far weaker than they were two years go. That is indisputable.

Quote:

---

Again, our interest is the ability to harm and neuter one of our adversaries for pennies on the dollar and weaken them. And Russia today is far weaker than they were two years go. That is indisputable.

---

It is disputable, LOL. And why is Russian one of adversaries? Ukraine has been more of an adversary than Russian and that is indisputable for people who know what is going on in the real world.

No one has talked about Ukrainian corruption or it be a cabal (Biden/Obama/Soros) hub for much nefarious activity that has harmed this nation much more than anything Russia has done.

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

Moreover, if we aren't worried about Russia taking/invading a nato country next...what again is the American interest in propping up the fascist Kiev regime? Hint: there is none. Our interests would be perfectly fine if Kiev is run by Moscow again, and energy/food prices globally would drop quickly.

---

Again, our interest is the ability to harm and neuter one of our adversaries for pennies on the dollar and weaken them. And Russia today is far weaker than they were two years go. That is indisputable.

---

No, that's pure conjecture wholly untethered to reality.

Their financial system is better off, their economy is surging, their oil and gas revenue is near all time highs, military is 15 percent larger, and military procurement dramatically higher (on the order of 2x what pre-war levels were.) They are actually doing so well they are expected to export (and train) a dozen or more SU-35's to Iran as soon as this month. Note the Iranian color scheme:



The war has unquestionably benefited BRICS and namely China and Russia, while costing Ukraine and Europe dearly.

Quote:

---

And why is Russian one of adversaries?

---

Because they don't like us (and the west in general) and seek to harm us and our interests across the globe.

Gotta give kudos to Nortex pulling receipts.

From your link...

Quote:

---

The loss of experienced soldiers has been particularly detrimental to the effectiveness and capability of the Russian military. Many of Russia's casualties have been among elite and professional soldiers, as well as the junior officer corps. New recruits often have less training than those they are replacing, exacerbating the impact of the losses and apparently eroding the effectiveness of some Russian military units. Some observers say the loss of such experienced troops will have a long-term detrimental effect on Russian military capabilities.

---

Quote:

---

With its wartime production posture, Russia's defense industry appears capable of building, upgrading, and repairing most equipment and weapon systems to sustain combat operations. It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

It cannot be said enough, but always read a Nortex link.

PlaneCrashGuy said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

OPAG said:

---

This is some major league spin. LOL


You have still not answered the schizophrenia or Stupid Russians that can't fight their way out of wet paper back.

and Super hype Russia that is going take over all of NATO!

We will just see how things go.

---

Has Tesla ever said anything like that?

---

Only almost daily for 226 pages now. Where have you been?

---

You need to re-read what I responded to.

Tesla has only discussed the first premise...

Yep. I've been adamant that Russia can't even take over Ukraine, much less NATO.

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

Moreover, if we aren't worried about Russia taking/invading a nato country next...what again is the American interest in propping up the fascist Kiev regime? Hint: there is none. Our interests would be perfectly fine if Kiev is run by Moscow again, and energy/food prices globally would drop quickly.

---

Again, our interest is the ability to harm and neuter one of our adversaries for pennies on the dollar and weaken them. And Russia today is far weaker than they were two years go. That is indisputable.

---

No, that's pure conjecture wholly untethered to reality.

Their financial system is better off, their economy is surging, their oil and gas revenue is near all time highs, military is 15 percent larger, and military procurement dramatically higher (on the order of 2x what pre-war levels were.) They are actually doing so well they are expected to export (and train) a dozen or more SU-35's to Iran as soon as this month. Note the Iranian color scheme:



The war has unquestionably benefited BRICS and namely China and Russia, while costing Ukraine and Europe dearly.

---

Not saying Russia won't sell jets to Iran, but that picture you thought was in Iranian camo has been around at least since 2016 when it was used in this article.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-lethal-su-35-fighter-vs-americas-f-35-f-15-f-16-who-17753

GAC06 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

Moreover, if we aren't worried about Russia taking/invading a nato country next...what again is the American interest in propping up the fascist Kiev regime? Hint: there is none. Our interests would be perfectly fine if Kiev is run by Moscow again, and energy/food prices globally would drop quickly.

---

Again, our interest is the ability to harm and neuter one of our adversaries for pennies on the dollar and weaken them. And Russia today is far weaker than they were two years go. That is indisputable.

---

No, that's pure conjecture wholly untethered to reality.

Their financial system is better off, their economy is surging, their oil and gas revenue is near all time highs, military is 15 percent larger, and military procurement dramatically higher (on the order of 2x what pre-war levels were.) They are actually doing so well they are expected to export (and train) a dozen or more SU-35's to Iran as soon as this month. Note the Iranian color scheme:



The war has unquestionably benefited BRICS and namely China and Russia, while costing Ukraine and Europe dearly.

---

Not saying Russia won't sell jets to Iran, but that picture you thought was in Iranian camo has been around at least since 2016 when it was used in this article.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-lethal-su-35-fighter-vs-americas-f-35-f-15-f-16-who-17753

---

wow

Teslag said:

---

From your link...

Quote:

---

The loss of experienced soldiers has been particularly detrimental to the effectiveness and capability of the Russian military. Many of Russia's casualties have been among elite and professional soldiers, as well as the junior officer corps. New recruits often have less training than those they are replacing, exacerbating the impact of the losses and apparently eroding the effectiveness of some Russian military units. Some observers say the loss of such experienced troops will have a long-term detrimental effect on Russian military capabilities.

---

Quote:

---

With its wartime production posture, Russia's defense industry appears capable of building, upgrading, and repairing most equipment and weapon systems to sustain combat operations. It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

It cannot be said enough, but always read a Nortex link.

---

Yep. The strategy appears to be to post a bunch of tweets/links that are either 1. questionable sources, or 2. summarized in a purposely misleading way or with half truths, and just by sheer volume the assumption is most people will take the summaries at face value.

And always topped off with bizarre unrelated one off anti-Biden/Ukraine insults (like saying they are an anti-semetic regime) or his usual "forever war!" strawman capper.

Then when called out he just ignores and post the next string of tweets/links. Rinse/repeat.

Nothing, at all, in his excerpt which you've gladly latched onto questions what I posted.

Quote:

---

It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

Speculations about what will happen in the future, long term, from one sentence of a multi-page analyses, doesn't mean they aren't stronger today. In fact, it is couching an optimistic/overall strengthened analyses with a minor caveat/variable, but as a partisan who only sees things from the Ukrainian Pravda side it is the only bit read/pasted in return.

Please advise what tangential statistical means you have to show Russia is presently "weaker today" than in early 2022. No, total casualty figures don't count (neither Putin nor Zelensky care about their cannon fodder). Misdirection about what an article says or ad Homs won't work, and I'll just ignore it.

nortex97 said:

---

Nothing, at all, in his excerpt which you've gladly latched onto questions what I posted.

Quote:

---

It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

Speculations about what will happen in the future, long term, from one sentence of a multi-page analyses, doesn't mean they aren't stronger today. In fact, it is couching an optimistic/overall strengthened analyses with a minor caveat/variable, but as a partisan who only sees things from the Ukrainian Pravda side it is the only bit read/pasted in return.

Please advise what tangential statistical means you have to show Russia is presently "weaker today" than in early 2022. No, total casualty figures don't count (neither Putin nor Zelensky care about their cannon fodder). Misdirection about what an article says or ad Homs won't work, and I'll just ignore it.

---

FWIW, that article doesn't say Russia is stronger today than they were when the war started.

It says that they've essentially stanched the bleeding and are now building back up at a good pace.

Largely with inferior refurbished crap

Ag with kids said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Nothing, at all, in his excerpt which you've gladly latched onto questions what I posted.

Quote:

---

It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

Speculations about what will happen in the future, long term, from one sentence of a multi-page analyses, doesn't mean they aren't stronger today. In fact, it is couching an optimistic/overall strengthened analyses with a minor caveat/variable, but as a partisan who only sees things from the Ukrainian Pravda side it is the only bit read/pasted in return.

Please advise what tangential statistical means you have to show Russia is presently "weaker today" than in early 2022. No, total casualty figures don't count (neither Putin nor Zelensky care about their cannon fodder). Misdirection about what an article says or ad Homs won't work, and I'll just ignore it.

---

FWIW, that article doesn't say Russia is stronger today than they were when the war started.

It says that they've essentially stanched the bleeding and are now building back up at a good pace.

---

Well look at the other one though.

Quote:

---

At a news conference, Austin and Gen. CQ Brown, America's top military officer, again detailed Russia's losses. But they added another trend: Russia's recovery.
"Russia has ramped up its production," Austin said. "All of their defense industry really answers directly to the state, so it's easier for them to do that a bit quicker."
Brown put it more simply: "Russia has aggressively reconstituted its military force."
Coming a month apart, the two sets of comments show a distinct change in how the U.S. views Russia's military. While American officials have long detailed the costs of Moscow's invasion for its armed forces and its economy, in the last two months they've started to acknowledge Russia is recovering faster than the U.S. expected.

---

Quote:

---

Still, European and American defense officials, along with experts on the Russian military, told Defense News the Kremlin's force is reconstituting faster than expected. They gave three main reasons why.
The first is the resilience of Moscow's defense industry.
During the war, Russia has almost tripled its defense budget, according to Richard Connolly, an expert on the country's economy at the London-based Royal United Services Institute think tank. Russia is set to spend somewhere between $130 billion and $140 billion on defense in 2024, which is about 6% of gross domestic product and a third of the government's overall budget, Connolly approximated.
But because costs and wages are lower in Russia than in high-income countries, like many in NATO, the Kremlin's defense fund buys much more than it would in the United States. When that conversion is taken into account, Russia's 2024 defense budget falls between $360 billion to $390 billion, Connolly estimated.
The spending trend itself has raised salaries. Working in the defense industry was once a middling career in Russia; it's now lucrative and attracting more workers. Based on official Russian figures, which Connolly noted may be inflated, the number of people working in the defense industry rose 20% during the war, from 2.5 million to about 3 million now.
The funds have also gone toward procuring military hardware. Connolly estimates this share of the defense budget probably doubled during the war, helping Russia replace lost equipment.
Connolly said he doubts the state of Russia's economy will factor into how the war ends. Moscow has a cadre of policy wonks guiding its country through sanctions, he noted, and they have lots of practice doing so. In fact, Putin recently replaced a general at the helm of the Defence Ministry with an economist.

---

There's no reason to think Russia is weaker today than in early 2022. At least, none that have actually been posted/cited here.

Where's the part about Russia being stronger now?

Losing the bulk of your junior officers, elite forces, and highly trained soldiers as his link stated, is most certainly a reason. You can't replace that easily or quickly. And certainly not in two years with current casualty rates.

FJB24 said:

---

Ag with kids said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

Nothing, at all, in his excerpt which you've gladly latched onto questions what I posted.

Quote:

---

It remains unclear whether the defense industry will be able to mass produce modern or advanced weapon systems or sustain production over the long term

---

Speculations about what will happen in the future, long term, from one sentence of a multi-page analyses, doesn't mean they aren't stronger today. In fact, it is couching an optimistic/overall strengthened analyses with a minor caveat/variable, but as a partisan who only sees things from the Ukrainian Pravda side it is the only bit read/pasted in return.

Please advise what tangential statistical means you have to show Russia is presently "weaker today" than in early 2022. No, total casualty figures don't count (neither Putin nor Zelensky care about their cannon fodder). Misdirection about what an article says or ad Homs won't work, and I'll just ignore it.

---

FWIW, that article doesn't say Russia is stronger today than they were when the war started.

It says that they've essentially stanched the bleeding and are now building back up at a good pace.

---

Well look at the other one though.

Quote:

---

At a news conference, Austin and Gen. CQ Brown, America's top military officer, again detailed Russia's losses. But they added another trend: Russia's recovery.
"Russia has ramped up its production," Austin said. "All of their defense industry really answers directly to the state, so it's easier for them to do that a bit quicker."
Brown put it more simply: "Russia has aggressively reconstituted its military force."
Coming a month apart, the two sets of comments show a distinct change in how the U.S. views Russia's military. While American officials have long detailed the costs of Moscow's invasion for its armed forces and its economy, in the last two months they've started to acknowledge Russia is recovering faster than the U.S. expected.

---

Quote:

---

Still, European and American defense officials, along with experts on the Russian military, told Defense News the Kremlin's force is reconstituting faster than expected. They gave three main reasons why.
The first is the resilience of Moscow's defense industry.
During the war, Russia has almost tripled its defense budget, according to Richard Connolly, an expert on the country's economy at the London-based Royal United Services Institute think tank. Russia is set to spend somewhere between $130 billion and $140 billion on defense in 2024, which is about 6% of gross domestic product and a third of the government's overall budget, Connolly approximated.
But because costs and wages are lower in Russia than in high-income countries, like many in NATO, the Kremlin's defense fund buys much more than it would in the United States. When that conversion is taken into account, Russia's 2024 defense budget falls between $360 billion to $390 billion, Connolly estimated.
The spending trend itself has raised salaries. Working in the defense industry was once a middling career in Russia; it's now lucrative and attracting more workers. Based on official Russian figures, which Connolly noted may be inflated, the number of people working in the defense industry rose 20% during the war, from 2.5 million to about 3 million now.
The funds have also gone toward procuring military hardware. Connolly estimates this share of the defense budget probably doubled during the war, helping Russia replace lost equipment.
Connolly said he doubts the state of Russia's economy will factor into how the war ends. Moscow has a cadre of policy wonks guiding its country through sanctions, he noted, and they have lots of practice doing so. In fact, Putin recently replaced a general at the helm of the Defence Ministry with an economist.

---

There's no reason to think Russia is weaker today than in early 2022. At least, none that have actually been posted/cited here.

---

Again...none of that says Russia is STRONGER. It just says they are building up faster than we expected.

In addition...the numbers being looked at are all supplied by the Russian government, which is known to lie about that kind of stuff...