Miscellaneous News

plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
siegecrossbow said:
Years on the historians will be collectively wondering "how we got here" and I'd point them to a list of government officials who were BCG or McKinsey alumni. Inept psychopathic organizations breed inept psychopathic leaders.
Click to expand...

Years on, the BCG/McKinsey alumni historians will blame it all on someone, anyone else. My guess would be the usual suspects of gays, Jews, Blacks, Chinese, with a sprinkling of modern updates like the Woke, TikTok and the ‘spoilt’ generations etc. The list is endless and has been rinse and repeated since the first historian.
 
BoraTas

BoraTas

Major
Registered Member
siegecrossbow said:
Years on the historians will be collectively wondering "how we got here" and I'd point them to a list of government officials who were BCG or McKinsey alumni. Inept psychopathic organizations breed inept psychopathic leaders.
Click to expand...
There is a reason why interacting with the US almost always ends up bad for "underdog" groups. Washington DC is full of people who are unfamiliar with the motive and means of the said groups, and after causing mayhem. And the US demands full compliance from such groups. Hong Kong protesters, for example, went ultra-aggressive after interacting with the USA and had Beijing finally crackdown with no opposition from most of Hong Kong. Ukraine is similar too. The country is wrecked and the only real harm to Russia was its reputation and sanctions (which Ukraine was nothing more than an excuse).
 
B

Biscuits

Colonel
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
There is a reason why interacting with the US almost always ends up bad for "underdog" groups. Washington DC is full of people who are unfamiliar with the motive and means of the said groups, and after causing mayhem. And the US demands full compliance from such groups. Hong Kong protesters, for example, went ultra-aggressive after interacting with the USA and had Beijing finally crackdown with no opposition from most of Hong Kong. Ukraine is similar too. The country is wrecked and the only real harm to Russia was its reputation and sanctions (which Ukraine was nothing more than an excuse).
Click to expand...
Tbh they will recover all of that reputation with interest once they're pressing up to NATO at the carpathians.

I'm not sure future analysts will necessarily say that Russia not escalating the conflict at the start was a mistake.

Like I've said, should Russia have started out by aggressively trying to take over the whole country, they might have been able to blitz through more layers of Ukraine, but they would barely have any consolidation there. Ukraine's population will still be intact. Some people were advocating for Syria/Gulf war style offensives, aside from Russia-Ukraine force balance being closer to US-Iran rather than much weaker Iraq, Gulf war and Syria did not eliminate the ability of the Iraqi or Syrian nation to create new anti American fighting groups.

But most importantly, if Russia had moved up as far as say the transcarpathians, what's to stop NATO from fully attacking, PVA in Korean war style? With full US complements of F35s, aircraft carriers and everything? They'd be blitzing overstretched, newly Russia occupied territory. Would Russia have been able to withstand such an offensive? All while mostly intact Ukrainian population did partisan work?

And don't repeat NATO lies of caring about nukes. They have no issues at all threatening territorial aggression against nuclear states.

Whereas in the current situation, who in NATO wants to put boots on the ground of Ukraine anymore? Whether intentionally or not, Putin assauged the egos of NATO, and now that the population have been convinced that they've already tried their best, they will not contemplate real actions that actually have a chance of beating Russia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top