| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Yurie
12175 Posts
Russia wants land it doesn't hold. Security guarantees for Ukraine is not approved by Russia and a bit weak for Ukraine's taste. Some mention how to run the nuclear plants afterwards as a serious issue but that seems easily solved. Just let France or somebody neutral run it as a non-profit and sell power at an agreed split between the countries. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17863 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44398 Posts
| ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5232 Posts
| ||
|
0x64
Finland4654 Posts
On February 18 2026 07:20 Uldridge wrote: All we're missing now is Wile E. Coyote as a Russian commander after the current one mysteriously falls out of a window. It really can't get more Looney Tunes in Russia can it? He'd be fine as long as he doesn't notice he has been thrown out of the window | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On February 18 2026 07:20 Uldridge wrote: All we're missing now is Wile E. Coyote as a Russian commander after the current one mysteriously falls out of a window. It really can't get more Looney Tunes in Russia can it? They'll be fine as long as they don't look down. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1844 Posts
Interesting article from AP, based on an interview with Zaluzhnyi. Highlights are: - there were tensions between him and Zelenskyy since the start of the war - this escalated (the first time) with SBU raiding one of his offices, the details on this are pretty murky tho - the other time they had strong disagreements was regarding 2023 counteroffensive where he wanted a large buildup and a single point of attack that would be focused on the Zaporizhzhia region and (in best case scenario) punch all the way through to the Azov Sea, cutting off the Russian corridor - apparently, this is what him and western advisors wanted but Zelenskyy disagreed, refusing to commit so many resources - his fundamental disagreement with Zelneskyy is that he thinks that his plans and strategy for the war is based on unrealistic number of troops and is not organized well in how it develops and deploys new technologies to the battlefield - finally, he said he was approached by Paul Manafort to be his campaign manager I'm honestly not really sure how to feel about this guy, but the fact that he was, according to this interview basically polite when saying no to Manafort gives me bad vibes, this motherfucker was absolutely part of election fixing and resurrected Yanukovych, it just seems weird tho mention that in an interview without putting the emphasis on telling him to fuck off. Of course, could be absolutely nothing but it made me feel weird. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9331 Posts
Another thing I don't understand is that in one part of the interview Zaluzhnyi says he supported an ambitious offensive in 2023, but in another, he says Ukraine's war strategy is bad at things that should be necessary to carry out such an offensive. I’m referring to the part about troop numbers and the use of new technologies. There’s probably a lot of context that I’m missing. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1844 Posts
I mean, Ukraine has adopted to new technologies great, they just recently kicked NATO's ass with little to no effort in war games, they invented like 50 different weapons and techniques over the last 4 years, I get criticizing strategies and having different opinions about stuff like realistic troop numbers, but this kind of seems like a strange thing to criticize coming from the ex-Army commander. I get why 2023 offensive failed, if I were Zelenskyy, I'd be very hesitant to dedicating a ton of troops and material to a single point of attack, that sounds like a recepy for a rain of iskanders taking out incredible amounts at the same time, but, then again, I am not a general or a strategist, so I might be way off. | ||
|
ZeroByte13
799 Posts
- either commit most of your forces in one direction, and then you can win a lot or lose a lot depending on how well this "all in" goes down - or be more safe, but then you could be slowling bleeding out... though maybe your opponent is bleeding out faster than you, but it also gives them time to adapt and come up with something new (if they can) And even if both approaches had similar chances of overall success - which of course I have no idea whether it's true or not - it's the first one that can get some definitive results faster, good or bad. Maybe some people in power believed a strong singular push would be successful, and some other people in power might want this war to end sooner one way or another. | ||
|
Billyboy
2609 Posts
You often see this in sports with trades that go bad, if some one else reports it was not your idea, great I get it. But throwing people under the bus after the fact is never cool. We are going to have tons of that whenever Trump is out of power and I’m calling BS in advance. | ||
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
Incredible piece about the leadup to Russias invasion | ||
|
Yurie
12175 Posts
On February 21 2026 04:00 zatic wrote: https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2026/feb/20/a-war-foretold-cia-mi6-putin-ukraine-plans-russia Incredible piece about the leadup to Russias invasion It is good to reflect back. I was in the camp of the people thinking this was yet another large exercise to put pressure on. It is something to take with us, even when a war is very stupid it does sometimes start anyway. That remains the largest problem for Taiwan, a rational China wouldn't invade but there is the example of irrational Russia. Thinking back I was more pessimistic on Ukrainian chances at the start as well. I have been proven wrong multiple times on this topic. Mostly by not understanding how weak and corrupt Russia is, there is always another level below the one I thought they were at. They are getting their military industry to the place it needs to be but can only run that for 1-2 more years at most. Now I am more of the opinion that a collapse of the Russian alliance structure and de facto loss of influence in Manchuria will happen even if the borders look the same. The only question remaining is if Russia itself collapses similar to the USSR due to this war. The demographic, economic, political loss of the war is so great I am uncertain if Russia will recover to a world power at all. Don't see how they can do it in 20 years as they did after the USSR. The population simply isn't there any more, immigration in the 100M class from India, Pakistan etc would be the only way to do that and it isn't in line with a fascistic Slavic government. (Well that or the rest of the world gets pummeled badly enough by global warming that they get dragged down to the same level.) | ||
|
Simberto
Germany12059 Posts
Thinking back I was more pessimistic on Ukrainian chances at the start as well. I have been proven wrong multiple times on this topic. Mostly by not understanding how weak and corrupt Russia is, there is always another level below the one I thought they were at. They are getting their military industry to the place it needs to be but can only run that for 1-2 more years at most. Absolutely. Before this war, I thought of Russia as basically the Soviet Union. The WW2 red army. Endless soldiers, endless tanks. Capable of basically marching across europe if it weren't for the threat of nuclear war. And i think i was not alone. The worst thing Russia lost in this war might have been that perception of being a first-rate army. | ||
|
Yurie
12175 Posts
On February 21 2026 05:48 Simberto wrote: Absolutely. Before this war, I thought of Russia as basically the Soviet Union. The WW2 red army. Endless soldiers, endless tanks. Capable of basically marching across europe if it weren't for the threat of nuclear war. And i think i was not alone. The worst thing Russia lost in this war might have been that perception of being a first-rate army. That is the interesting thing. They have lost that perception. But they have also just upgraded their army multiple tiers by fighting an actual war that kills the worst ideas and parts of the army. Either by enemy action of by falling out of windows. It is still far from where it should be, but in a better place than at the start of the war. If the next war is in 3 years and being fought on a static border with drones then Russia is probably a first rate force. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10978 Posts
I mean... Yeah, if the war would stop for 3 years, I have no doubt that Russia would have taken some lessons to heart and be way better at "waring" but thats not the world we live in? | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On February 21 2026 06:54 Velr wrote: Aren't you disregarding that Russia also lost most of their elite units and is therefore now using badly trained soldiers? I mean... Yeah, if the war would stop for 3 years, I have no doubt that Russia would have taken some lessons to heart and be way better at "waring" but thats not the world we live in? Not to mention their stock of materiel is severely diminished. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10978 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5890 Posts
On February 21 2026 05:51 Yurie wrote: That is the interesting thing. They have lost that perception. But they have also just upgraded their army multiple tiers by fighting an actual war that kills the worst ideas and parts of the army. Either by enemy action of by falling out of windows. It is still far from where it should be, but in a better place than at the start of the war. If the next war is in 3 years and being fought on a static border with drones then Russia is probably a first rate force. I'm not sure it killed the worst ideas on the Russian side. Corruption is endemic in Russia and has only gotten worse. They still send countless soldiers into suicide attacks. They even turned that into an extortion scheme where commanders threaten soldiers they will send them to certain death unless they pay up. They still claim victories "on credit" and then send wave after wave to actually take the settlement while denying the soldiers artillery support because they can't shell "their own positions". | ||
|
KwarK
United States44398 Posts
On February 21 2026 05:48 Simberto wrote: Absolutely. Before this war, I thought of Russia as basically the Soviet Union. The WW2 red army. Endless soldiers, endless tanks. Capable of basically marching across europe if it weren't for the threat of nuclear war. And i think i was not alone. The worst thing Russia lost in this war might have been that perception of being a first-rate army. In 1940 Germany was able to put 6 million men in uniform fairly easily too. There was a very large young male generation due to changing family dynamics and large agricultural surpluses. They were still regularly having 10 child families back then. Today's Germany looks very different. I’m sure as a German you can see the change within your own nation. Russia has been subject to the same changes. The demographic weirdness of early industrialization is unlikely to ever be repeated. | ||
| ||
|
|
FEL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
IntoTheTV X SOOP
ByuN vs Lambo
MaxPax vs Bunny
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
IntoTheTV X SOOP
SHIN vs GuMiho
Clem vs Classic
WardiTV Invitational
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
