The War in the Ukraine

Atomicfrog said:

Just probing maybe, where all the Ukrainian troops of Kherson side have gone anyway? Nothing to guard there anymore on the west bank... they all have been absorbed in Bakhmut ?

Click to expand...

Honestly I'm starting to think they are building a dispersed mechanized army in preparation for a big last hurrah in the spring. Where are the rest of the armor they were given? They didn't lose it all, it's not been seen much at all. Where are they hiding all this stuff? What about their T84s? Haven't seen them much at all. They are preparing for something big and using conscripted human meat to buy time for it. Probably a big push right into Crimea and sacking the Black Sea Fleet is their goal. Wouldn't be surprised that the Russians don't prepare for it nor even think it's comming

You Russians better not get complacent with this weak period of Ukro wermacht they are up to something behind the lines.

Atomicfrog said:

Whatever... Ukraine is receiving train loads of weapons from all over the world, even if Russia or Wagner would receive some, why the sour grapes ? That's just some high level of stupidity to make a fuss even if it's real.

Click to expand...

In the same vein, people complaining about NATO mercenaries when the entirety of NATO is emptying their stockpile into Ukraine is also quite pointless. Is there a functional difference between sending in HIMARS/providing real time ISR vs sending in 5000 Mercs in terms of escalation? I'd argue the former has a much larger impact on the war.

Even if NATO sent their army in so what? This is a war that Russia chose to participate in, nothing is ever fair in war, complaining about mercenaries when Wagner is spearheading their own advance is quite ironic to say the least.

Russia is also free to procure aid from any of its allies, when it has a shortage of manpower none of its allies actually came to its aid. Even material support from Iran required them to give away su-35s.

tankphobia said:

Even if NATO sent their army in so what? This is a war that Russia chose to participate in, nothing is ever fair in war, complaining about mercenaries when Wagner is spearheading their own advance is quite ironic to say the least.

Click to expand...

Then NATO should just jump in and drop the hypocritical moral grandstanding about how they are totally not at war with Russia.

Sets the precedence that Russia doesnt view as them as protected under the Geneva Convention.

Also the ones complaining the most about mercs are the west, whining about Wagner even since they got involved in Libya when the only reason there is a market for PMC's un Libya is because of NATO in the first place. Then there are the afventures of western Mercs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

tankphobia said:

when it has a shortage of manpower none of its allies actually came to its aid

Click to expand...

The shortage of manpower is self impossed on their refusal to do a full movilization, not because they lack people. Hardly the same.

On the other hand, the euros are talking about rounding up Ukranian refugees and sending them back to die

tankphobia said:

In the same vein, people complaining about NATO mercenaries when the entirety of NATO is emptying their stockpile into Ukraine is also quite pointless. Is there a functional difference between sending in HIMARS/providing real time ISR vs sending in 5000 Mercs in terms of escalation? I'd argue the former has a much larger impact on the war.

Even if NATO sent their army in so what? This is a war that Russia chose to participate in, nothing is ever fair in war, complaining about mercenaries when Wagner is spearheading their own advance is quite ironic to say the least.

Russia is also free to procure aid from any of its allies, when it has a shortage of manpower none of its allies actually came to its aid. Even material support from Iran required them to give away su-35s.

Click to expand...

Wow, speaking of such authority... Are you finally going to send in NATO troops now, General tankphobia?

Jokes aside, none of what you are saying couldn't be used by the opposing side. If NATO really is formed by "democratic" countries, then why shouldn't they send in their troops, now (and for a long time now) that the general public in the west is (and has been) gung ho about defeating Russia and stopping the "Russian invasion"? Aren't they supposed to be democratic and listen to their people?

Why are:
1. celebrities and civilians fundraisers doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?
2. mercenaries and volunteers (consider that they are citizens of western countries, and many of whom were in active services) from the West are doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?
3. the military industrial construct of the west are doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?
4. the western propaganda machine and media are doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?

What are NATO troops so afraid of, when even the above four groups, which is certainly much more vulnerable than NATO troops, are not afraid to put their lives and money on the line to confront Russia? After all, even civilians volunteers can help the Ukrainians "defeat" Russia, yet NATO troops are too afraid to confront Russia directly?

I've been seeing your side "proving" that even Russian nuclear capabilities are nothing to be afraid of for a while now, and quite convincingly. If Russia is a paper tiger, why not to end the suffering of Ukrainian people more swiftly? NATO troops are yet still unwilling to get involved. Why must that be?

Why should they let:
1. civilian private volunteers risk their lives,
2. civilians and fundraisers risk their money,
3. military industrial complex risk their equipment (and reputations, as they are handed to people not the best trained to use them, in an environment and organizational structure not best coordinated to use them)?

Aren't NATO troops granted their livelihood by the taxpayers of said NATO countries? Aren't these NATO countries already established that they are totally and unreservedly opposed to "Russian invasion"? Heck! Even the Military Industrial Complex are generating revenues and sales and earning money for the country and economy!

Yet, NATO troops are nothing but eating taxpayer's money (吃空饷).

The political will is there, the general public support is there, the money is abundant. Yet NATO troops are still unwilling to get directly involved for some reason.

Shouldn't these NATO troops be the first to die and to fight for their cause? Should the military budget spent on them the first to go to good use? Unless NATO don't consider fighting Russian invasion their cause, nor a good use; else I couldn't think of any other reason to justify their rationale.

This only leaves me to believe that the Russia still has abundant power and fighting ability to deter direct NATO troops involvement.

tankphobia said:

Russia is also free to procure aid from any of its allies, when it has a shortage of manpower none of its allies actually came to its aid. Even material support from Iran required them to give away su-35s.

Click to expand...

Russia's main problem now isn't lack of man power, any way, but lack of equipment.

It is interesting that none of its allies came to its aid, while the US was able to force its allies to cough up support. The US seems to have a much tighter leash on its vassals - which was also demonstrated during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, where the US was the invader but still got its "coalition of the willing" to follow along - and this is indeed a signal of Russia's decline.

tankphobia said:

Even if NATO sent their army in so what? This is a war that Russia chose to participate in, nothing is ever fair in war, complaining about mercenaries when Wagner is spearheading their own advance is quite ironic to say the least.

Click to expand...

I am not interested in arguing for or against the justification of mercenaries, but I find your comparison of Wagner and Western mercenaries absurd.

Wagners are Russian citizens fighting on behalf of their own country against foreign forces regardless their legal status. The western mercenaries are not. Also remember being paid is not the definition of mercenary, every soldier is paid even the conscript. The difference is who one is fighting for, your own country or another. You are essentially comparing a country's militia with mercenary, that is absurd.

Strangelove said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Russia ‘fights to the end’ – Borrell​

The West must keep arming Ukraine because Moscow defeated Napoleon and Hitler, the EU’s top diplomat said

Josep Borrell © AFP

EU foreign policy commissioner Josep Borrell said on Friday that the West must keep sending weapons to Kiev, warning those who think Russia has lost or is doing poorly that Moscow has a history of winning long wars.

“Russia is a great country, a great nation that is used to fighting to the end, almost losing and then recovering,” Borrell said in a speech in Madrid, bringing up the 1812 invasion by Napoleon Bonaparte’s French empire and the 1941 invasion by Adolf Hitler’s Germany as historical examples of this.

“It would be absurd to think that Russia has lost the war or that its military is incompetent,” Borrell added.

He claimed that so far Moscow “has been losing the war but it still has enormous strength and capacity to continue [fighting].”

Because of this, he said, “now is the time to continue arming Ukraine with the necessary material and military means to wage the kind of war it has to wage.” He described this as “not only a defensive war but one that allows it to take the initiative and break fronts and prevent Russia from launching a new, very powerful and bloody offensive in a few months.”

Borrell’s invocation of Napoleon and Hitler was unusual, as Moscow has repeatedly compared the current efforts by the collective West with the two invasions, known as the Patriotic War and the Great Patriotic War, respectively.

Napoleon led a multinational army recruited from all across French-dominated Europe and reached Moscow, but failed to compel Russia’s surrender. The war ended with Russian cavalry on the streets of Paris two years later. Hitler’s effort, also aided by numerous continental allies and vassals, fell just short of Moscow. The Axis armies were savaged at Stalingrad and turned back at Kursk, with Russian soldiers taking Berlin in 1945.

According to Russian estimates, the US and its allies funneled almost $100 billion worth of weapons, ammunition and supplies to the Ukrainian military in 2022. Despite this unprecedented effort, Borrell on Friday continued to insist the West was not a party to the conflict, and that the EU did everything it could to avoid it. Former leaders of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, however, publicly admitted that the European-mediated Minsk agreements had been a ploy to buy Ukraine time to prepare for war.

The EU’s high commissioner for foreign affairs spoke at Madrid’s Teatro Real, where he was presented with the New Economy Forum 2022 Award. One of the presenters was Javier Solana, Borrell’s predecessor at the EU post and NATO’s secretary general in 1999, when the US-led bloc launched an unprovoked war against Yugoslavia.

Click to expand...

What a moron. He says himself that Russia has stood against much more dangerous opponents and succeeded. Yet we need to keep up the 1/4 measures to fight Russia. Lol. Seriously this is a circus, there is no more fitting description

Eventine said:

Russia's main problem now isn't lack of man power, any way, but lack of equipment.

It is interesting that none of its allies came to its aid, while the US was able to force its allies to cough up support. The US seems to have a much tighter leash on its vassals - which was also demonstrated during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, where the US was the invader but still got its "coalition of the willing" to follow along - and this is indeed a signal of Russia's decline.

Click to expand...

Yeah bro, Russia is finished. Ursula beat all of Russia with sanctions. Brought it to its knees. Russians live like cavemen now. Ukraine is winning and will win, somehow defeating a nuclear power. No allies = lost bro. Just wait until a few challengers and Leopards show up with thr CV90. Putin will be back bacon

Finally we in the west can sustain our lives sucking off the natural resources of Russia for free. So exciting

memfisa said:

Honestly I'm starting to think they are building a dispersed mechanized army in preparation for a big last hurrah in the spring. Where are the rest of the armor they were given? They didn't lose it all, it's not been seen much at all. Where are they hiding all this stuff? What about their T84s? Haven't seen them much at all. They are preparing for something big and using conscripted human meat to buy time for it. Probably a big push right into Crimea and sacking the Black Sea Fleet is their goal. Wouldn't be surprised that the Russians don't prepare for it nor even think it's comming

You Russians better not get complacent with this weak period of Ukro wermacht they are up to something behind the lines.

Click to expand...

lul

"they didn't lose it all" copium.

Not if you believe AFU's own reports where they lost 13000 men total... when even NATO mouthpieces say hundreds are lost every day in Bakhmut alone...

For Ukranians, when their own citizens are doing well in saturation attacks, they're the "elite NATO style forces" and "special forces of Azov", yet when they run into determined defense and get ground down, they become "conscripted human meat buying time for the REAL army", and the name Azov is forgotten after most their fighters died in Mariupol.

It is absurd to claim the Ukraine forces at Bakhmut are of any signficant worse quality than rest of the forces when there's not a single report on either Russia or Ukraine side that purports this.

taxiya said:

I am not interested in arguing for or against the justification of mercenaries, but I find your comparison of Wagner and Western mercenaries absurd.

Wagners are Russian citizens fighting on behalf of their own country against foreign forces regardless their legal status. The western mercenaries are not. Also remember being paid is not the definition of mercenary, every soldier is paid even the conscript. The difference is who one is fighting for, your own country or another. You are essentially comparing a country's militia with mercenary, that is absurd.

Click to expand...

Arent the western mercenaries the exact same? Fighting on behalf of Washington against their government's enemies.

Wagner are explicitly not militia but a PMC hired by the Russian government.

I don't think anyone except westerners are complaining about the status quo of mercenaries.

sheogorath said:

Then NATO should just jump in and drop the hypocritical moral grandstanding about how they are totally not at war with Russia.

Sets the precedence that Russia doesnt view as them as protected under the Geneva Convention.

Click to expand...

Isn't this the much vaunted grey zone warfare that Russia pioneered? I never said NATO would/should send their troops in, my exact wording was, even if they did, so what?

taxiya said:

I am not interested in arguing for or against the justification of mercenaries, but I find your comparison of Wagner and Western mercenaries absurd.

Wagners are Russian citizens fighting on behalf of their own country against foreign forces regardless their legal status. The western mercenaries are not. Also remember being paid is not the definition of mercenary, every soldier is paid even the conscript. The difference is who one is fighting for, your own country or another. You are essentially comparing a country's militia with mercenary, that is absurd.

Click to expand...

Would you not argue that the West sending their own mercenaries in is also in their best interest? Just as they were invited by the Ukrainian government so there's really nothing wrong with western Mercernaries joining the fray, in the end a good outcome for Ukraine benefits the west.

Jingle Bells said:

Why are:
1. celebrities and civilians fundraisers doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?
2. mercenaries and volunteers (consider that they are citizens of western countries, and many of whom were in active services) from the West are doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?
3. the military industrial construct of the west are doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?
4. the western propaganda machine and media are doing more than what actual NATO troops are doing?

Click to expand...

Outside of internet warriors I have not seen any substantial support for the involvement of boots on the ground for NATO, your whole spiel is based on something nobody was even suggesting. Please read what I said carefully, no where did I say NATO should invade Russia, I said there is no point being sour grapes about any potential NATO involvement as this is exactly what Russia asked for when they chose to start this SMO.