PlaneCrashGuy said:Teslag said:
Russia just took 6 months to take 2 miles and Nortex is over here talking about Odessa, which is 90 miles from Kherson, which is still in Ukrainian hands and in no danger of falling. Hell it's not even near a possible offensive any time soon.
Didn't Odessa get hit with a double tap last night?
Teslag said:PlaneCrashGuy said:Teslag said:
Russia just took 6 months to take 2 miles and Nortex is over here talking about Odessa, which is 90 miles from Kherson, which is still in Ukrainian hands and in no danger of falling. Hell it's not even near a possible offensive any time soon.
Didn't Odessa get hit with a double tap last night?
You can't take a city with a couple of long range missiles shots.
2 miles. 6 months.
PlaneCrashGuy said:Teslag said:PlaneCrashGuy said:Teslag said:
Russia just took 6 months to take 2 miles and Nortex is over here talking about Odessa, which is 90 miles from Kherson, which is still in Ukrainian hands and in no danger of falling. Hell it's not even near a possible offensive any time soon.
Didn't Odessa get hit with a double tap last night?
You can't take a city with a couple of long range missiles shots.
2 miles. 6 months.
I guess this is your new shtick since "millimeters" didn't work out so well. Sorry for interrupting.
Teslag said:PlaneCrashGuy said:Teslag said:PlaneCrashGuy said:Teslag said:
Russia just took 6 months to take 2 miles and Nortex is over here talking about Odessa, which is 90 miles from Kherson, which is still in Ukrainian hands and in no danger of falling. Hell it's not even near a possible offensive any time soon.
Didn't Odessa get hit with a double tap last night?
You can't take a city with a couple of long range missiles shots.
2 miles. 6 months.
I guess this is your new shtick since "millimeters" didn't work out so well. Sorry for interrupting.
Show me something. Don't tell me something.
Teslag said:
I wanna see Russians taking significant ground. Why can't you provide it? For a year now this thread has been telling us what Russia is going to do.
Well, when are they going to do it?
Teslag said:
And you question reading comprehension? Wow
Thx, I agree frankly with you as to their products being suitable for export (yet the same could be said for quality goods from China yet…size matters). And, frankly, their economy in terms of total size, or GDP per capita, is still not really…compelling, nor is it likely to be in my lifetime.wtmartinaggie said:
I feel like we're chasing a rabbit here. We're so far from the initial discussion, let's try to get it back on track.
Russia has a tight labor market, yes. They are doing what they can to promote domestic production, yes. Is that highly relevant to whether the war in Ukraine is in the US national interest or not, not enough to change the overall calculus. They do not produce quality goods highly marketable abroad. They do not innovate and create new globally marketable technologies. A large portion of their highly educated population abandoned them when the war started, so it's likely that it will continue to diminish in those capacities. Any way you shake it Russia is a raw material exporter, that's what drives their economy.
If you could respond to some of the other points I've made or point out something you'd like me to address, I'd really like to keep this going. You clearly have done your homework, and I appreciate that you're informed and open to a respectful discussion instead of hurling insults around.
Claiming to be exhausting the evil 'them' is betrayed again by the point that they are now stronger, and wealthier, at least where it counts; their ruling class. I really dislike on a visceral level the rationalization that we are 'helping' the world/ourselves by getting two Slavic countries to sacrifice a few hundred thousand people/serfs in a nominal war of attrition over land I could care less about and an outdated treaty organization I think we should have nothing further to do with.Quote:
"The supreme art of war is to subdue your enemy without fighting." -Sun Tzu
We're not fighting, and they are expending immense resources, manpower, and upending their long-term economic strategy in this fight. All that for 5% of our military budget with no boots on the ground? What a bargain.
Quote:
they are now stronger,
😂
— ayden (@squatsons) March 11, 2024
Oh Paul… pic.twitter.com/DQgkVHg8SX
GAC06 said:
Got a source for Russia "moving their economy into the top five globally"? Certainly you didn't just consume one independent thinker's repost of "trollstoy" uncritically then parrot it because you wanted it to be true. Right?
Teslag said:Ags4DaWin said:Teslag said:PlaneCrashGuy said:wtmartinaggie said:
At this moment in time yes, they are. That isn't the same as them having more capability than the West, or even the US individually. How Ukraine is currently performing is not comparable to how NATO or the US would perform if directly involved.
The more we talk the more I think I understand our differences of opinion, which could be wrong. You're looking at today and tomorrow, I'm looking further ahead. Their fully mobilized war economy outproduces us today, yes. Earmark this and check in here in a few years. Our infrastructure is insulated geographically and highly defensible sans the introduction of nuclear weapons to the theatre. Russia's is not. Their only true defense in a direct conflict with the West is the threat of nuclear war. Full stop.
When will the abandonment of the green initiatives and ramp up of our industrial production actually start? That would have to be the 1st step to catching up, no?
BTW, their war economy being fully mobilized is the basis for the assertion that they're stronger today than 2 years ago; even if a few planes have gone down and boats have sunk since then.
Is that why they are begging the Norks for ammo and send old tanks to the lines?
Producing a lot of crap just means you have a lot of crap. Russia in 2022 was much stronger than now. And they made the gains to prove it. Now they can't do **** but gain a couple miles in 6 months.
Don't tell me. Show me.
Come on. I thought u were a military guy.
Any idiot that has studied the history of war knows that has always been Russia's war strategy.
They have a **** ton of raw materials and people. Overwhelm your opponent with material even if it is junk.
They have more material and more men. Eventually the other side runs out of material and they win.
The few times they have lost they were not able to employ this strategy.
This is nothing new. You stating that they are employing the strategy they have always used is NOT an indicator they will use
Rather it's an indicator we are about to see history repeat itself.
Like they did in Afghanistan?
PlaneCrashGuy said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Teslag said:
So are we for "war porn" and "war cheerleaders" now on this thread?
Apparently. PCG has been cheerleading/mocking Ukrainian casualties since the beginning though. So noble.
Please spare us your crocodile tears.
Ags4DaWin said:Teslag said:Ags4DaWin said:Teslag said:PlaneCrashGuy said:wtmartinaggie said:
At this moment in time yes, they are. That isn't the same as them having more capability than the West, or even the US individually. How Ukraine is currently performing is not comparable to how NATO or the US would perform if directly involved.
The more we talk the more I think I understand our differences of opinion, which could be wrong. You're looking at today and tomorrow, I'm looking further ahead. Their fully mobilized war economy outproduces us today, yes. Earmark this and check in here in a few years. Our infrastructure is insulated geographically and highly defensible sans the introduction of nuclear weapons to the theatre. Russia's is not. Their only true defense in a direct conflict with the West is the threat of nuclear war. Full stop.
When will the abandonment of the green initiatives and ramp up of our industrial production actually start? That would have to be the 1st step to catching up, no?
BTW, their war economy being fully mobilized is the basis for the assertion that they're stronger today than 2 years ago; even if a few planes have gone down and boats have sunk since then.
Is that why they are begging the Norks for ammo and send old tanks to the lines?
Producing a lot of crap just means you have a lot of crap. Russia in 2022 was much stronger than now. And they made the gains to prove it. Now they can't do **** but gain a couple miles in 6 months.
Don't tell me. Show me.
Come on. I thought u were a military guy.
Any idiot that has studied the history of war knows that has always been Russia's war strategy.
They have a **** ton of raw materials and people. Overwhelm your opponent with material even if it is junk.
They have more material and more men. Eventually the other side runs out of material and they win.
The few times they have lost they were not able to employ this strategy.
This is nothing new. You stating that they are employing the strategy they have always used is NOT an indicator they will use
Rather it's an indicator we are about to see history repeat itself.
Like they did in Afghanistan?
Afghanistan was a different war than what Russia is fighting here.
And I was very precise with my words.
Russia never tried to wear Afghanistan down. And then go in for the kill circa ww2.
They tried to hold it while the Afghanistan wore Russia down.
Note I said when Russia uses their traditional tactics which is to throw meaningless people and material at the enemy to soak up their bullets and equal or superior material.
I Afghanistan Russia was the technologically superior force. And there was no central point for them to Spear or centralized army for them to wear down.
Russia fought a western war in Afghanistan and lost.
Thank you for proving my point.
BREAKING:
— Armchair Warlord (@ArmchairW) March 16, 2024
Greece literally giving Ukraine equipment left over from World War Two!
I'm not even kidding, the M114 was introduced in 1941.
And what exactly are they going to use 90mm ammunition in, Pershings? https://t.co/KQod1BOb7U pic.twitter.com/0On3LTlEdm
"Krai" has two meanings in Slavic languages, one is "area, region" and the other "the end".
— Nik Stankovic (@nikstankovic_) March 16, 2024
Ukraine's (Ukraina) name stems from being at "the end", a borderland. A different borderland back in the day, but these borders tend to stick for centuries even when not official.
For…
Quote:
BUDAPEST, Hungary (AP) Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbn sought to mobilize support for his brand of right-wing populism in a holiday speech on Friday, urging his spectators to help him "occupy Brussels" in European Union elections this summer.
Orbn's address, coinciding with a national holiday commemorating Hungary's failed 1848 revolution against Habsburg rule, railed against the EU and compared it to imperial occupiers that have dominated Hungary throughout history.
The nationalist leader, speaking from the steps of the National Museum in central Budapest, drew a sharp contrast between his country and the "Western world," accusing the latter of being a source of rootlessness and destruction.
"They start wars, destroy worlds, redraw countries' borders and graze on everything like locusts," he told the crowd, many of whom were bused into Budapest for the occasion. "We Hungarians live differently and want to live differently."
🇺🇦🇷🇺‼️🚨 If you blend out the hysteria and look for (even Ukranian) sources announcing the dead, you’ll find that the Odessa strike yesterday hit high ranking military personell. https://t.co/H6nKFVcUoS
— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) March 16, 2024
Visit https://t.co/uGH0wtsRBN for tickets, information and more. This is going to be an epic movie. https://t.co/ZZ24jRuViS
— Tracy Beanz (@tracybeanz) March 16, 2024
Updated: Johnson not planning to put Senate foreign aid bill to a vote, weighing other options: GOP source https://t.co/8JHeSdyM9A
— John Solomon (@jsolomonReports) March 16, 2024
India is nearing an agreement with Tesla worth $2 billion investment for #EV imports and new plant in Gujarat. This will be a significant milestone for Tesla in India. #Velsig #geopolitics pic.twitter.com/GKYsh3usIL
— Velina Tchakarova (@vtchakarova) March 15, 2024
J. Walter Weatherman said:Teslag said:
That's because there was no peace deal.
I think he's referring to the one Ukraine rejected because they knew Russia was full of **** and would just invade again. But I guess if a random tech billionaire with zero foreign policy experience read it on the internet it must be true.
Since you're replying to me I think you are snarking about me being twisted up about…stuff. I do recall being repeatedly corrected that we were just giving them old/surplus stuff, and just yesterday or the day before that Europe didn't need to ramp up so much because of the modern tech weapons which don't need as much artillery shells etc.GAC06 said:
It seems like a certain perspective was really twisted up about the idea Ukraine was fighting Russia mostly with hand me down crap when they wanted to claim NATO was exhausting their modern weapons. Now they're twisted that they're being given…. old hand me down weapons?
GAC06 said:
It seems like a certain perspective was really twisted up about the idea Ukraine was fighting Russia mostly with hand me down crap when they wanted to claim NATO was exhausting their modern weapons. Now they're twisted that they're being given…. old hand me down weapons?
YouBet said:
In other news, it looks like Ukrainian drone attacks in the Black Sea have secured grain export volumes that are almost back to pre-war levels. So that's good for folks depending on that.
YouBet said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Teslag said:
That's because there was no peace deal.
I think he's referring to the one Ukraine rejected because they knew Russia was full of **** and would just invade again. But I guess if a random tech billionaire with zero foreign policy experience read it on the internet it must be true.
He read it in the MSM which has been widely reported multiple times by and including the WSJ. There was a deal on the table. Were the terms good? Depends on what side you are on.
The fact is that the US scuttled it. Back then, the UK, Germany, and France were pressuring Zelensky to take the deal which was also reported by the WSJ but Biden overruled it.
Those three have since reversed course with Germany playing both sides like we are doing in the current Israel-Gaza War.
This is all common knowledge.
J. Walter Weatherman said:YouBet said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Teslag said:
That's because there was no peace deal.
I think he's referring to the one Ukraine rejected because they knew Russia was full of **** and would just invade again. But I guess if a random tech billionaire with zero foreign policy experience read it on the internet it must be true.
He read it in the MSM which has been widely reported multiple times by and including the WSJ. There was a deal on the table. Were the terms good? Depends on what side you are on.
The fact is that the US scuttled it. Back then, the UK, Germany, and France were pressuring Zelensky to take the deal which was also reported by the WSJ but Biden overruled it.
Those three have since reversed course with Germany playing both sides like we are doing in the current Israel-Gaza War.
This is all common knowledge.
Except the US scuttling the deal is not a fact at all. It can be argued but it's definitely an opinion that's up for debate. It would have been a slow suicide for Ukraine to agree to any peace deal where they agree to not join NATO because Russia would just attack again in a couple years. They smartly know not to trust them at all and decided that trying to fight was a better path, regardless of any input from other countries.
Indirectly, I'm sure the aid certainly gave them more confidence that they didn't need to surrender, but let's not pretend Zelenskyy was rushing to say yes and give up his country before Biden/the west called and told him to say no.
WSJ. Been a while. I would have to find the article.Teslag said:
Who reported it? Who did they cite?
Quote:
A draft peace treaty drawn up by Russian and Ukrainian negotiators in April 2022, about six weeks after the start of the war, lays bare the sort of deal Putin was after at the time. Western officials and analysts say the Kremlin clings to its original objectives after two years of fighting: Turn Ukraine into a neutered state permanently vulnerable to Russian military aggression.
nortex97 said:Since you're replying to me I think you are snarking about me being twisted up about…stuff. I do recall being repeatedly corrected that we were just giving them old/surplus stuff, and just yesterday or the day before that Europe didn't need to ramp up so much because of the modern tech weapons which don't need as much artillery shells etc.GAC06 said:
It seems like a certain perspective was really twisted up about the idea Ukraine was fighting Russia mostly with hand me down crap when they wanted to claim NATO was exhausting their modern weapons. Now they're twisted that they're being given…. old hand me down weapons?
But, apparently we need to replenish our stocks with top notch stuff and also Europe is donating 80 year old artillery systems. The hypocrisy of the claims made is my point. I don't care that Greece is shipping Ukraine some 1942 light artillery systems.
YouBet said:J. Walter Weatherman said:YouBet said:J. Walter Weatherman said:Teslag said:
That's because there was no peace deal.
I think he's referring to the one Ukraine rejected because they knew Russia was full of **** and would just invade again. But I guess if a random tech billionaire with zero foreign policy experience read it on the internet it must be true.
He read it in the MSM which has been widely reported multiple times by and including the WSJ. There was a deal on the table. Were the terms good? Depends on what side you are on.
The fact is that the US scuttled it. Back then, the UK, Germany, and France were pressuring Zelensky to take the deal which was also reported by the WSJ but Biden overruled it.
Those three have since reversed course with Germany playing both sides like we are doing in the current Israel-Gaza War.
This is all common knowledge.
Except the US scuttling the deal is not a fact at all. It can be argued but it's definitely an opinion that's up for debate. It would have been a slow suicide for Ukraine to agree to any peace deal where they agree to not join NATO because Russia would just attack again in a couple years. They smartly know not to trust them at all and decided that trying to fight was a better path, regardless of any input from other countries.
Indirectly, I'm sure the aid certainly gave them more confidence that they didn't need to surrender, but let's not pretend Zelenskyy was rushing to say yes and give up his country before Biden/the west called and told him to say no.
Debatable. It's been reported in the past we pulled the plug. More recent statements from Biden's camp say we didn't. The problem is that Biden's camp is as trustworthy as Putin or Zelensky which means they aren't trustworthy at all.
Pit of vipers.
