NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.
On July 11 2023 01:32 Magic Powers wrote: Brigadier Gen. Mark Kimmitt explains the type of defense that Ukraine's troops have been pushing into lately.
There are many inaccuracies in the video, as far as I can tell.
There were only a few instances of the Ukrainians losing a larger number of vehicles in an operation early on in the counter-offensive, and in one of them the Ukrainians were still in the staging ground (supposedly ambushed by Russian artillery). If there were numerous such debacles, the Russians would've had more footage. They were milking one such failed attack for weeks, showing it from every angle.
Bakhmut did not "flip between the Russian and Ukrainian forces numerous times". That's utter nonsense and makes me question just how closely this general is following the conflict. The city was partially captured by DNR forces in 2014 and fully recaptured by the Ukrainians after a few months of fighting. It remained under Ukrainian control until 2023 and is under Russian control to this day.
The idea that Ukraine would attempt to go through a massive, heavily fortified city like Donetsk to reach the Russian border sounds ridiculous. I don't think I've seen any other expert claim that.
Finally, half of the video talks about the layered defences and how they are slowing the Ukrainians down. That seems not grounded in reality, at least according to the available sources. The Ukrainians have, for the most part, engaged with Russian forward outposts, some scattered defensive lines and numerous Russian counter-attacks. They have reached the first defensive lines only in a handful of locations. Additionally, it's the Russian side that appears to be suffering higher casualties (certainly in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses). It's as if that general was describing some wargaming scenario instead of what's actually happening on the ground.
The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
You're conflating the position of the echelon defense (the relative positions of the occupied bunkers, trenches, and other defensive measures prepared) with layered defense (the actual reach of Ka-52 deployment, the overlapping sphere of AA complexes, the Spetsnaz operatives that provides reconnaissance and targeting data in the grey zone, etc.). The latter extends deep into no man's land. The UAF has to suppress those elements before they can even reach the first line.
On July 11 2023 03:56 CosmicSpiral wrote: The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
Last time I checked Oryx, the Russians were losing more equipment.
You're conflating the position of the echelon defense (the relative positions of the occupied bunkers, trenches, and other defensive measures prepared) with layered defense (the actual reach of Ka-52 deployment, the overlapping sphere of AA complexes, the Spetsnaz operatives that provides reconnaissance and targeting data in the grey zone, etc.). The latter extends deep into no man's land. The UAF has to suppress those elements before they can even reach the first line.
Did you even watch the video? What are you on about?
I can't help but think this is just optics from Turkey's POV.... As if Erdogan would allow it to go ahead if it had a chance to pass through the Parliament...
VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) — URGENT: NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg says Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has agreed to send Sweden’s NATO accession protocol to the Turkish Parliament “as soon as possible.”
Stoltenberg made the announcement after talks with Erdogan and Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson on the eve of a NATO summit in Lithuania.
Sweden’s NATO accession has been held up by objections from Turkey since last year.
Well, in the Danish media it is worded as Erdogan having promised to get Sweden ratified and that he will work towards getting the parlament to vote as soon as possible (so the uncertainty is supposedly on when, rather than whether - if Danish media got it right).
On July 11 2023 03:56 CosmicSpiral wrote: The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
Last time I checked Oryx, the Russians were losing more equipment.
Oryx is highly unreliable as relying on open-source intelligence means it will frequently double or triple count losses that are taken from multiple instances of photographic evidence, mistake Ukrainian losses portrayed as Russian losses, and so on. All putative "open source intelligence" websites suffer from this verification problem.
You're conflating the position of the echelon defense (the relative positions of the occupied bunkers, trenches, and other defensive measures prepared) with layered defense (the actual reach of Ka-52 deployment, the overlapping sphere of AA complexes, the Spetsnaz operatives that provides reconnaissance and targeting data in the grey zone, etc.). The latter extends deep into no man's land. The UAF has to suppress those elements before they can even reach the first line.
Did you even watch the video? What are you on about?
Well, Mark Kimmitt is just plain wrong. He's describing the potential pitfalls of a Ukrainian attempt to breach through all three levels of the standard Russian echelon defence. It's not a "layered defence": that's a completely different term referring to overlapping fields of fire that also work to blunt and destroy an advancing attack. It's the latter + anti-tank mine scattering that has limited the gains of the counteroffensive.
At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
On July 11 2023 03:56 CosmicSpiral wrote: The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
Last time I checked Oryx, the Russians were losing more equipment.
Oryx is highly unreliable as relying on open-source intelligence means it will frequently double or triple count losses that are taken from multiple instances of photographic evidence, mistake Ukrainian losses portrayed as Russian losses, and so on. All putative "open source intelligence" websites suffer from this verification problem.
On July 11 2023 05:03 maybenexttime wrote:
You're conflating the position of the echelon defense (the relative positions of the occupied bunkers, trenches, and other defensive measures prepared) with layered defense (the actual reach of Ka-52 deployment, the overlapping sphere of AA complexes, the Spetsnaz operatives that provides reconnaissance and targeting data in the grey zone, etc.). The latter extends deep into no man's land. The UAF has to suppress those elements before they can even reach the first line.
Did you even watch the video? What are you on about?
Well, Mark Kimmitt is just plain wrong. He's describing the potential pitfalls of a Ukrainian attempt to breach through all three levels of the standard Russian echelon defence. It's not a "layered defence": that's a completely different term referring to overlapping fields of fire that also work to blunt and destroy an advancing attack. It's the latter + anti-tank mine scattering that has limited the gains of the counteroffensive.
So if they are unreliable, what is the reliable source you have that supports your conclusion?
I don't rely on any one source for obvious reasons:
- This is a very polarizing war in the information space, so many allegedly "objective" sources are just thinly veined propaganda. This includes pessimistic Russian Telegram channels that overreact to every perceived setback, Ukrainian . None of them have access to ISR complexes that actually battlefield. - Official sources suffer from that and basic issues of methodology. For example, does the Russian Ministry of Defense round its daily numbers on the high side or the low side? And how do they estimate casualties, given that it's not possible to witness whether every instance is truly sanitary, minor, debilitating, etc. We've had similar problems with estimating small arms ammo usage in Vietnam, figuring out how far we degraded the Taliban's strength in Afghanistan, etc.
What I do is match claims against corroborating evidence and whether they make sense given my background in military history. Claims from Kiev that they reliably shoot down 95% of all Russian cruise missile and drone assaults? Reliably bunk, given that such consistent success would mark a revolution in anti-air defense that has no tactical or technological basis in reality.
On July 11 2023 03:56 CosmicSpiral wrote: The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
Last time I checked Oryx, the Russians were losing more equipment.
Oryx is highly unreliable as relying on open-source intelligence means it will frequently double or triple count losses that are taken from multiple instances of photographic evidence, mistake Ukrainian losses portrayed as Russian losses, and so on. All putative "open source intelligence" websites suffer from this verification problem.
It may not be perfect but it's still one of the most reliable sources out there. Can you show any significant number of double or triple counts or are you just making assumptions? The data provided by Oryx is, broadly speaking, in line with the assessment offered by Western intelligence. Also, could you explain why Oryx would mistake Ukrainian losses as Russian and not the other way around?
Well, Mark Kimmitt is just plain wrong. He's describing the potential pitfalls of a Ukrainian attempt to breach through all three levels of the standard Russian echelon defence. It's not a "layered defence": that's a completely different term referring to overlapping fields of fire that also work to blunt and destroy an advancing attack. It's the latter + anti-tank mine scattering that has limited the gains of the counteroffensive.
So you disagreed with me while repeating what I said, perhaps, using more technically correct terms... As I pointed out, the Ukrainian counter-offensive is not slowed down by the defences described in great detail in the video because the Ukrainian forces, for the most part, are not engaging with the described defences.
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
Nice use of your 1k post though congrats.
What's the West going to do? Sanction Russia, again? for the 12th or 13th or w/e time? Idk if you noticed but most of the world doesn't care about Western sanctions because Russia actually has real tangible goods to trade, and unlike the US, Russia doesn't impose all kinds of BS on a country for trading or developing their economies.
The real question is, is NATO ready to go to nuclear war over their proxy in Ukraine, and I think the answer is no. Despite their malthusian, depopulation goals they have, I don't think they want to totally flip over the chess board just yet, that could change obviously, I'm just calling it as I see it right now.
On July 11 2023 03:56 CosmicSpiral wrote: The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
Last time I checked Oryx, the Russians were losing more equipment.
Oryx is highly unreliable as relying on open-source intelligence means it will frequently double or triple count losses that are taken from multiple instances of photographic evidence, mistake Ukrainian losses portrayed as Russian losses, and so on. All putative "open source intelligence" websites suffer from this verification problem.
On July 11 2023 05:03 maybenexttime wrote:
You're conflating the position of the echelon defense (the relative positions of the occupied bunkers, trenches, and other defensive measures prepared) with layered defense (the actual reach of Ka-52 deployment, the overlapping sphere of AA complexes, the Spetsnaz operatives that provides reconnaissance and targeting data in the grey zone, etc.). The latter extends deep into no man's land. The UAF has to suppress those elements before they can even reach the first line.
Did you even watch the video? What are you on about?
Well, Mark Kimmitt is just plain wrong. He's describing the potential pitfalls of a Ukrainian attempt to breach through all three levels of the standard Russian echelon defence. It's not a "layered defence": that's a completely different term referring to overlapping fields of fire that also work to blunt and destroy an advancing attack. It's the latter + anti-tank mine scattering that has limited the gains of the counteroffensive.
So if they are unreliable, what is the reliable source you have that supports your conclusion?
The whole gimmick about oryx is that they post pictures of all the losses and all but asks the public to check the pictures to see if its a unique loss or not. They remove doubles all the time and don't pretend to be any more accurate than the evidence they show. With all the drones up in the air on both sides if there was so significantly more losses on the Ukrainian side they would have all the motivation to show them.
If they were killing challengers HIMARS leopards bradleys M3777's they would be showing it off just like the Ukranians have been of all the photos of kills Russia has been suffering.
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
Nice use of your 1k post though congrats.
What's the West going to do? Sanction Russia, again? for the 12th or 13th or w/e time? Idk if you noticed but most of the world doesn't care about Western sanctions because Russia actually has real tangible goods to trade, and unlike the US, Russia doesn't impose all kinds of BS on a country for trading or developing their economies.
The real question is, is NATO ready to go to nuclear war over their proxy in Ukraine, and I think the answer is no. Despite their malthusian, depopulation goals they have, I don't think they want to totally flip over the chess board just yet, that could change obviously, I'm just calling it as I see it right now.
Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders? Do you think Russia has nothing to lose from not being able to trade with western nations? Do you think china trades more with the west or Russia? Do you think Russia sells anything unique that can't be found anywhere else in the world?
What you are describing is a carpet bombing effort on a scale that even the US didn't achieve in Vietnam. NATO doesn't need to go nuclear they just need to let Poland and the baltics off the chain for a week.
On July 11 2023 05:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: I can't help but think this is just optics from Turkey's POV.... As if Erdogan would allow it to go ahead if it had a chance to pass through the Parliament...
VILNIUS, Lithuania (AP) — URGENT: NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg says Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has agreed to send Sweden’s NATO accession protocol to the Turkish Parliament “as soon as possible.”
Stoltenberg made the announcement after talks with Erdogan and Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson on the eve of a NATO summit in Lithuania.
Sweden’s NATO accession has been held up by objections from Turkey since last year.
It's a formality. There would be no rhyme or reason for Erdogan to hide behind parliament on this or to pretend to be out of sync with it.
It looks like he tried to leverage their NATO vote to get a foot in the door for Turkey's accession to the EU but I can't see that happening, the last thing the EU wants or needs right now is a roided up Orban.
On July 11 2023 03:56 CosmicSpiral wrote: The Russian side is not suffering higher casualties in terms of visually confirmed vehicle losses, sanitary losses, or even territorial losses (they have been advancing from Kremennaya towards Kupyiansk and Lyman at the same time the southern counteroffensive has taken place). It's true that the UAF has largely abstained from utilizing armored columns as the tip of the spear, but they've been consistently losing the likes of MRAPs and M-777s in small bunches scattered along the entire front. That's simply the result of lacking the necessary air and artillery superiority to utilize breakthrough forces and negate the reconnaissance fire complex that is halting their advances in the grey zone.
Last time I checked Oryx, the Russians were losing more equipment.
Oryx is highly unreliable as relying on open-source intelligence means it will frequently double or triple count losses that are taken from multiple instances of photographic evidence, mistake Ukrainian losses portrayed as Russian losses, and so on. All putative "open source intelligence" websites suffer from this verification problem.
On July 11 2023 05:03 maybenexttime wrote:
You're conflating the position of the echelon defense (the relative positions of the occupied bunkers, trenches, and other defensive measures prepared) with layered defense (the actual reach of Ka-52 deployment, the overlapping sphere of AA complexes, the Spetsnaz operatives that provides reconnaissance and targeting data in the grey zone, etc.). The latter extends deep into no man's land. The UAF has to suppress those elements before they can even reach the first line.
Did you even watch the video? What are you on about?
Well, Mark Kimmitt is just plain wrong. He's describing the potential pitfalls of a Ukrainian attempt to breach through all three levels of the standard Russian echelon defence. It's not a "layered defence": that's a completely different term referring to overlapping fields of fire that also work to blunt and destroy an advancing attack. It's the latter + anti-tank mine scattering that has limited the gains of the counteroffensive.
So if they are unreliable, what is the reliable source you have that supports your conclusion?
I don't rely on any one source for obvious reasons:
- This is a very polarizing war in the information space, so many allegedly "objective" sources are just thinly veined propaganda. This includes pessimistic Russian Telegram channels that overreact to every perceived setback, Ukrainian . None of them have access to ISR complexes that actually battlefield. - Official sources suffer from that and basic issues of methodology. For example, does the Russian Ministry of Defense round its daily numbers on the high side or the low side? And how do they estimate casualties, given that it's not possible to witness whether every instance is truly sanitary, minor, debilitating, etc. We've had similar problems with estimating small arms ammo usage in Vietnam, figuring out how far we degraded the Taliban's strength in Afghanistan, etc.
What I do is match claims against corroborating evidence and whether they make sense given my background in military history. Claims from Kiev that they reliably shoot down 95% of all Russian cruise missile and drone assaults? Reliably bunk, given that such consistent success would mark a revolution in anti-air defense that has no tactical or technological basis in reality.
The drone assults are made by propeller drones slowly gliding alone in a straight path. The Cruise missiles are the same thing NATO has known exists from the fall of the soviet union. The PATRIOT system is that revolution for the hypersonics. a missle going in a straight line isn't the wunderwaffe promised. PATRIOTS were designed to take down ICBM, and while I don't think they're realistically capable of that they are capable most likely of dealing with Kinzals seeing how they can track the planes they are launched from with AWACS across the border and then track them the whole way they come to the capitol.
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
Nice use of your 1k post though congrats.
What's the West going to do? Sanction Russia, again? for the 12th or 13th or w/e time? Idk if you noticed but most of the world doesn't care about Western sanctions because Russia actually has real tangible goods to trade, and unlike the US, Russia doesn't impose all kinds of BS on a country for trading or developing their economies.
The real question is, is NATO ready to go to nuclear war over their proxy in Ukraine, and I think the answer is no. Despite their malthusian, depopulation goals they have, I don't think they want to totally flip over the chess board just yet, that could change obviously, I'm just calling it as I see it right now.
Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders? Do you think Russia has nothing to lose from not being able to trade with western nations? Do you think china trades more with the west or Russia? Do you think Russia sells anything unique that can't be found anywhere else in the world?
What you are describing is a carpet bombing effort on a scale that even the US didn't achieve in Vietnam. NATO doesn't need to go nuclear they just need to let Poland and the baltics off the chain for a week.
> Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders?
I'm not talking about nuking anything. I'm talking about completely conventional warfare, which Russia has shown it exceeds the West at.
You think I need to listen to western sources, I think you need to listen to Pro Russian sources (many of whom are American or European).
The difference is, the West measurably, and demonstrably, has more control over the mental means of production than any other country on earth. They have incentive to lie about everything, to maintain their monopoly. Russia doesn't, they lie more by omission than anything else, but for the most part, they are served well by the truth, which is what their media outlets like RT and Sputnik are designed to do, platform Western dissidents to their own populations.
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
Nice use of your 1k post though congrats.
What's the West going to do? Sanction Russia, again? for the 12th or 13th or w/e time? Idk if you noticed but most of the world doesn't care about Western sanctions because Russia actually has real tangible goods to trade, and unlike the US, Russia doesn't impose all kinds of BS on a country for trading or developing their economies.
The real question is, is NATO ready to go to nuclear war over their proxy in Ukraine, and I think the answer is no. Despite their malthusian, depopulation goals they have, I don't think they want to totally flip over the chess board just yet, that could change obviously, I'm just calling it as I see it right now.
Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders? Do you think Russia has nothing to lose from not being able to trade with western nations? Do you think china trades more with the west or Russia? Do you think Russia sells anything unique that can't be found anywhere else in the world?
What you are describing is a carpet bombing effort on a scale that even the US didn't achieve in Vietnam. NATO doesn't need to go nuclear they just need to let Poland and the baltics off the chain for a week.
> Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders?
I'm not talking about nuking anything. I'm talking about completely conventional warfare, which Russia has shown it exceeds the West at.
You think I need to listen to western sources, I think you need to listen to Pro Russian sources (many of whom are American or European).
The difference is, the West measurably, and demonstrably, has more control over the mental means of production than any other country on earth. They have incentive to lie about everything, to maintain their monopoly. Russia doesn't, they lie more by omission than anything else, but for the most part, they are served well by the truth, which is what their media outlets like RT and Sputnik are designed to do, platform Western dissidents to their own populations.
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
Nice use of your 1k post though congrats.
What's the West going to do? Sanction Russia, again? for the 12th or 13th or w/e time? Idk if you noticed but most of the world doesn't care about Western sanctions because Russia actually has real tangible goods to trade, and unlike the US, Russia doesn't impose all kinds of BS on a country for trading or developing their economies.
The real question is, is NATO ready to go to nuclear war over their proxy in Ukraine, and I think the answer is no. Despite their malthusian, depopulation goals they have, I don't think they want to totally flip over the chess board just yet, that could change obviously, I'm just calling it as I see it right now.
Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders? Do you think Russia has nothing to lose from not being able to trade with western nations? Do you think china trades more with the west or Russia? Do you think Russia sells anything unique that can't be found anywhere else in the world?
What you are describing is a carpet bombing effort on a scale that even the US didn't achieve in Vietnam. NATO doesn't need to go nuclear they just need to let Poland and the baltics off the chain for a week.
> Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders?
I'm not talking about nuking anything. I'm talking about completely conventional warfare, which Russia has shown it exceeds the West at.
You think I need to listen to western sources, I think you need to listen to Pro Russian sources (many of whom are American or European).
The difference is, the West measurably, and demonstrably, has more control over the mental means of production than any other country on earth. They have incentive to lie about everything, to maintain their monopoly. Russia doesn't, they lie more by omission than anything else, but for the most part, they are served well by the truth, which is what their media outlets like RT and Sputnik are designed to do, platform Western dissidents to their own populations.
I'm sorry if I am misreading your posts, but may I ask why you think Russia hasn't done this yet? Why is Russia hesitating to end the war if they are able to? You are saying they can end the war whenever they want, without nukes, so why not just do that?
On July 11 2023 05:59 captainwaffles wrote: At the end of the day, Ukraine is outnumbered. The Pro West camp can keep deluding themselves if they want to, but us living in the real world can do basic math, as Putin has said, Ukraine is outnumbered 10:1. This war will end however and whenever Russia wants it to end. contrary to what you've been told by the main stream media, Russia has been going soft, hoping to negotiate, but if/whenever they've decided they've had enough of this nonsense from the West, they can just level the Western part of Ukraine and do regime change in Kiev.
Do you think there will be consequences for Russia if they did this? Do you comprehend the level of death and destruction you are claiming that Russia is capable of? Ask yourself why they continue to wastes lives and money if this has been an option for more than 500 days. What are they waiting for?
Nice use of your 1k post though congrats.
What's the West going to do? Sanction Russia, again? for the 12th or 13th or w/e time? Idk if you noticed but most of the world doesn't care about Western sanctions because Russia actually has real tangible goods to trade, and unlike the US, Russia doesn't impose all kinds of BS on a country for trading or developing their economies.
The real question is, is NATO ready to go to nuclear war over their proxy in Ukraine, and I think the answer is no. Despite their malthusian, depopulation goals they have, I don't think they want to totally flip over the chess board just yet, that could change obviously, I'm just calling it as I see it right now.
Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders? Do you think Russia has nothing to lose from not being able to trade with western nations? Do you think china trades more with the west or Russia? Do you think Russia sells anything unique that can't be found anywhere else in the world?
What you are describing is a carpet bombing effort on a scale that even the US didn't achieve in Vietnam. NATO doesn't need to go nuclear they just need to let Poland and the baltics off the chain for a week.
> Do you think the radioactive fallout from nukeing Ukraine would stay in its borders?
I'm not talking about nuking anything. I'm talking about completely conventional warfare, which Russia has shown it exceeds the West at.
You think I need to listen to western sources, I think you need to listen to Pro Russian sources (many of whom are American or European).
The difference is, the West measurably, and demonstrably, has more control over the mental means of production than any other country on earth. They have incentive to lie about everything, to maintain their monopoly. Russia doesn't, they lie more by omission than anything else, but for the most part, they are served well by the truth, which is what their media outlets like RT and Sputnik are designed to do, platform Western dissidents to their own populations.
I'm sorry if I am misreading your posts, but may I ask why you think Russia hasn't done this yet? Why is Russia hesitating to end the war if they are able to? You are saying they can end the war whenever they want, without nukes, so why not just do that?
Because the only thing Putin hates more than the Ukrainians are the Russians, duh. ;-)
EPT
