| 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
12028 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
Poland17664 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States43588 Posts
| ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5049 Posts
| ||
|
0x64
Finland4603 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 States35169 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
Croatia1161 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.
Poland9279 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
Croatia1161 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
783 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
1457 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. | ||
| ||
|
|
Epic.LAN
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
herO vs NightMare
Reynor vs Cure
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
Replay Cast
PiG Sty Festival
Serral vs YoungYakov
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
