The War in the Ukraine
- Thread starter SampanViking
- Start date
Well if it weren't for enormous corruption at every level of social life, making fortunes out of poor people making them even poorer and creating some baseless dystopian and dysfunctional state without backing up in economy in the name of whatever I bet Russia would fare much better in any sort of military conflict.
The difference is in morale and people still fight wars - not equipment.
No mention of having all of NATO ISR assets in the área at their disposal, as if that is something minor.
Without it, even with all of the equipment received, they would have fáiled miserably a long time ago
Without it, even with all of the equipment received, they would have fáiled miserably a long time ago
What's the complaint here? There is no unfair or fair in the world.
Its only if you are strong enough.
Russia wanted to bully Ukraine because it felt Ukraine was weak. Now NATO is "bullying" Russia because Russia is weak enough.
Simple as that. The lessons to take from this debacle is:
- Being weak, you deserve to be trampled.
- If you are weak, seek external help
- If you are weak, and can't seek external help, lower your demands, and external help will surely come.
Does count as weakness if Russia is perfectly capable of knocking them out but at the risk of escalating the conflict with no guarantee of it not going nuclear?
Yes it does. If you have a weapon but can't or won't use it, does it really count as a weapon then?
I am not saying that nuclear weapons are useless but due to the taboo of using them, they can only be used for deterrence or for nuclear blackmail (which Russia could very well opt to go for, which in that case, they are not useless and as such, Russia is strong).
Terms of strong or weak are interchangeable depending on the circumstances on the ground. While Russia relies only on conventional weaponry it can be called weak relative to the entire West. When it comes to nuclear weapons, Russia can be considered strong.
As at the moment nuclear weapons are not in the conversation, Russia can be considered weak which is why you see all these NATO actions from the start of the war until now
Generally if I feel like referring to a topic I do so, I did not know that you were the one who dictated the topic to be published, however, I have more than a month, waiting for a single proof of the thousands of Ukrainian casualties that you suppose and want adjust to his narrative, but that does not justify more than with videos than in numbers, they fall short of the videos that there are of the Russian casualties in Kherson... When you bring a moderately credible source, let me know
Last edited by a moderator:
Ukraine is undoubtedly suffering massive casualties for their counteroffensive. There have been multiple articles where they interviewed Ukrainian soldiers at the frontline and universally the reports have been terrible losses for the Ukrainians in their push for territorial control. I'll link some of these articles and I believe everybody would agree that the New York Times and Washington Post holds a fairly pro-Ukrainian stance and is far from being pro-Russia.
The quotes from the Ukrainian soldiers that “we lost five people for every one they did” and "we lost 50 guys in two hours" definitely paint a picture in line with Russia's claim that they are bleeding Ukrainian manpower for every bit of land they are taking.
There is also definitely a propaganda push online now where any negative news regarding Ukraine is heavily criticized regardless of how factual they are. The best example that comes to mind is Julian Röpcke. Regardless of how factual you believe he's claims are, You can quite clearly see despite being quite pro-Ukrainian, when his post conflict with Ukrainian propaganda he is quite heavily criticized and often time without merit, with a lot of criticism simply attacking his character instead of what he is reporting.
As a result there's a lot of selfcensorship online regarding the Ukraine conflict where Ukrainian achievement are often over-hyped, and its losses or shady actions are undercounted or brushed aside.
Last edited:
One major major major problem that Russia has is their lack of optical satellites. They only have 3 operational optical recon satellites remaining: the recently launched (March 2022) BARS-M, then Persona 2 and 3. All their other satellites like the EMKA series decayed out of orbit and weren't replaced, or failed.
This is nothing. Russian Space Forces are asleep or something. For comparison, China has the civilian Jilin-1 constellation with 75 full sized (1+ ton, <1 m resolution) optical satellites.
If Russian forces are not buying satellite imagery from China, they have to start yesterday. It is no wonder Ukrainian forces are achieving operational surprise.
This is nothing. Russian Space Forces are asleep or something. For comparison, China has the civilian Jilin-1 constellation with 75 full sized (1+ ton, <1 m resolution) optical satellites.
If Russian forces are not buying satellite imagery from China, they have to start yesterday. It is no wonder Ukrainian forces are achieving operational surprise.
You think a near space blimp drone or a near space balloon could have help them to overcome their satellite-surveillance deficit?
