Russian Ukraine shenanigans

[HossHarris]

49 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Go read some history on Soviet era Russification efforts in places like the Baltic states or Ukraine.

It might be pretty informative as to why a nation is willing to risk so much for a dire outcome vs take what they know in eventuality will be a pretty dire outcome.

Also read up on what a mismatch Finland was and apply that to the current situation. The reason Finland was willing to still accept violence as the outcome (and they didn’t see it going so lopsided at the time) was because they could look next door at what happened to their neighbors who submitted to the big bully’s advances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pffft. History. 
 

 

[WillJamForFood]

47 minutes ago, Lawman said:

Go read some history on Soviet era Russification efforts in places like the Baltic states or Ukraine.

It might be pretty informative as to why a nation is willing to risk so much for a dire outcome vs take what they know in eventuality will be a pretty dire outcome.

Also read up on what a mismatch Finland was and apply that to the current situation. The reason Finland was willing to still accept violence as the outcome (and they didn’t see it going so lopsided at the time) was because they could look next door at what happened to their neighbors who submitted to the big bully’s advances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The parallels between the two courses of these two wars is truly remarkable, the key difference being that the Finns were utterly lacking in international support of the material variety. Ultimately, Finland agreed to a negotiated peace in which they ceded more territory to the USSR than the Soviets had initially demanded. Despite this, history remembers the Winter War as a "win" for Finland; the Soviets suffered lopsided casualties and considerable damage to their international prestige, while the Finn's maintained sovereignty and boosted their own reputation. Is it realistic to expect a better outcome for Ukraine today?

[uhhello]

Wonder what a negotiated 'truce' looks like for Russia at this point.  Ukrainians aren't going to stop fighting in Crimea for a long time.  It won't be force on force like now but I can't imagine it will be a comfortable lifestyle for anyone truly Russian in those areas.    

[tac airlifter]

20 hours ago, nsplayr said:

Which pieces of your hometown / state / etc. would you be willing to negotiate away after you've been invaded by your belligerent neighbor? Please be specific.

Quite a bit if the alternative was my family dying, and I would deeply resent a foreign power meddling in my business.  I’d bide my time and wage an insurgency when I felt I had the upper hand.  But I wouldn’t bleed my neighbors against an adversary so much larger than me, I’d play it smart like the Taliban and eventually gain my land back.  What were witnessing is just bad tactics.

It is astounding to me how the warmonger crowd acknowledges they are sending kids into the meat grinder with no hope of victory yet they claim moral superiority for their stance.  All the while advocating for somebody else’s family die with the guns we give them.  I do enjoy war and I don’t mind killing Russians, but what is happening right now is just foolish. Brought to you by the same people who lost Afghanistan and gave Iraq to the Iranians, lol.

[Clark Griswold]

Yeah copy not a nice option but neither is losing your entire military aged male demographic to a war of attrition. I feel like people are looking for a good option when all that exists are bad or less bad options. 

This

There is a point where you’ve done everything you can and for your future you need to let it go or tell someone who you are funding to let it go but then you would have not consider that person just a weapon to hurt your bigger enemy in a giant geopolitical chess game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lawman]

Quite a bit if the alternative was my family dying, and I would deeply resent a foreign power meddling in my business.  I’d bide my time and wage an insurgency when I felt I had the upper hand.  But I wouldn’t bleed my neighbors against an adversary so much larger than me, I’d play it smart like the Taliban and eventually gain my land back.  What were witnessing is just bad tactics.
It is astounding to me how the warmonger crowd acknowledges they are sending kids into the meat grinder with no hope of victory yet they claim moral superiority for their stance.  All the while advocating for somebody else’s family die with the guns we give them.  I do enjoy war and I don’t mind killing Russians, but what is happening right now is just foolish. Brought to you by the same people who lost Afghanistan and gave Iraq to the Iranians, lol.

Tell me you haven’t been to Iraq in the last 5 years without just saying it.

Sadr not immediately kicking us out of that country and bulldozing our ramps in Erbil is proof the Iranians have far less influence than they wanted over there.

Again, do you think given historic examples of what happens with Russification the Ukrainians aren’t fully aware and willingly fighting this war? They didn’t start this fight with HIMARS and Leo IIs. They begged for more so they could stand up and fight a country that enjoyed a safe mobilization area 80 km from their capital and was supposed to have bulldozed them in a week.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tac airlifter]

5 hours ago, Lawman said:

Tell me you haven’t been to Iraq in the last 5 years without just saying it.

Wrong again, lol. 

[raimius]

The side willing to fight for a longer duration usually wins.  Which side that is, what duration, and how many casualties is not yet clear.

[ClearedHot]

Obviously you can't trust the casualty claims form either side but there is some rather stunning and sobering data that can be extrapolated from Russian compensation spending.  Russia has spent $25.6 billion on compensation to families of deceased soldiers and $21 billion on compensation to the wounded. Putin has previously signed a decree earlier in the year ordering the payout of $68,800 to the families of deceased and $41,300 to soldiers that are wounded. Using this we can get a glance at potential Russian casualties...assuming zero corruption and money laundering.

KIA: 372,093

WIA: 508,474

Total Casualties: 880,567

 

That’s in 18 months. The US lost 420,000 in 4 years of WWII.  Very sobering.

 

 

[BashiChuni]

16 hours ago, Lawman said:

Tell me you haven’t been to Iraq in the last 5 years without just saying it.

Sadr not immediately kicking us out of that country and bulldozing our ramps in Erbil is proof the Iranians have far less influence than they wanted over there.

Again, do you think given historic examples of what happens with Russification the Ukrainians aren’t fully aware and willingly fighting this war? They didn’t start this fight with HIMARS and Leo IIs. They begged for more so they could stand up and fight a country that enjoyed a safe mobilization area 80 km from their capital and was supposed to have bulldozed them in a week.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Tell me you don’t understand erbil and the Kurds without just saying it

[Lawman]

Tell me you don’t understand erbil and the Kurds without just saying it

We were going off post in Not ERBIL without force pro. Contrast that with being there only a few years earlier when we were issuing grenades to people who would normally never get them and briefing the “if they (PMF) come across the Amber zone…” COA.

I know some of the group probably never used route Irish before, but we used to not be able to move personnel in between the Embassy/Airport/Taji over certain ranks without using an AMR. We also couldn’t fly down what used to be Tampa due to PR concerns..

Saying we “surrendered” Iraq to Iranian influence or anything else like it is just way off base of the current political struggle for dominance in that country. It’s not 2008-2013 anymore. It may have surprised a lot of people, but Sadr is not the puppet a lot of people were expecting him to be. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/iraq-iran-shiites/


But back to the original point you guys keep ignoring. Why were the Ukrainians so willing to defend themselves against the hopeless cause of the Russian Juggernaut? Do you think they were convinced of an IOU? That’s surprising considering how little in heavy weapons and equipment they started this war with. Or maybe just maybe they had some reason to evaluate the risk to action/inaction vs outcomes and invested themselves in the one that is the best bad option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Boomer6]

On 9/18/2023 at 6:05 PM, Clark Griswold said:

This

There is a point where you’ve done everything you can and for your future you need to let it go or tell someone who you are funding to let it go but then you would have not consider that person just a weapon to hurt your bigger enemy in a giant geopolitical chess game


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

God forbid the US will never face the kind of existential threat that Ukraine is facing. If we do face that, I hope those of you suggesting to “let it go” when it comes to national survival/sovereignty are no longer in the military.

[Lawman]

God forbid the US will never face the kind of existential threat that Ukraine is facing. If we do face that, I hope those of you suggesting to “let it go” when it comes to national survival/sovereignty are no longer in the military.

https://www.france24.com/en/video/20230717-ukrainians-kidnapped-to-russia-france-24-meets-children-brought-back-home


Forget borders. I’m having a hard time imagining something more motivating than stealing your children. Wild Animal instinct would demand that’s not ok, much less the idea of a rules based order of National Sovereignty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

41 minutes ago, Boomer6 said:

God forbid the US will never face the kind of existential threat that Ukraine is facing. If we do face that, I hope those of you suggesting to “let it go” when it comes to national survival/sovereignty are no longer in the military.

So you should cut off your nose to spite your face.

[Boomer6]

24 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

So you should cut off your nose to spite your face.

If you mean did I swear to support and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, then yes, I did swear to that. If China at some point attempts to take control of say Guam or Hawaii then I would not be on the side of let’s “just let it go.”

[Clark Griswold]

If you mean did I swear to support and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, then yes, I did swear to that. If China at some point attempts to take control of say Guam or Hawaii then I would not be on the side of let’s “just let it go.”

But we’re not talking about that, this Ukraine vs Russia, even with our help they are looking at a Pyrrhic victory if they goaded and supplied by us make it unacceptable to stop fighting unless every square inch of territory the Russians recently took they get back which is highly unlikely, they will run out of men at the rate of attrition and the Russians will still have enough men to come back at them

The Finns faced this same thing in the Winter War, we chalk that up as a win for them even though to end it they ended up ceding more territory to Soviets than they initially demanded of them. It was a victory against the Soviets because the Finns didn’t win but because they didn’t lose

They didn’t lose the majority of their country, the kept their sovereignty and they bloodied the bullies nose

Sometimes a shit sandwich is just what destiny has served you for lunch


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Boomer6]

We’re talking about a country’s right to defend its sovereignty against a foreign aggressor, which is exactly what my example describes. Call me naive but I couldn’t accept being told to give up by another government were it my country. Which is why I find it hypocritical to suggest the US do that in this situation. If you want to vote to stop sending them arms, fine. That’s not the same as demanding they relinquish their territory.

[Clark Griswold]

We’re talking about a country’s right to defend its sovereignty against a foreign aggressor, which is exactly what my example describes. Call me naive but I couldn’t accept being told to give up by another government were it my country. Which is why I find it hypocritical to suggest the US do that in this situation. If you want to vote to stop sending them arms, fine. That’s not the same as demanding they relinquish their territory.

Fair enough
They can continue to fight but if it were my job I’d tell them past point X it will not be with our support
They may want to fight but continuing the war may not actually be in our interest vs theirs, as we are their main patron it is our call as to whether they get our support, if the Europeans wish to fill our position, go ahead
Food instability is rising, Russian hydrocarbons are not being produced or sold in the regular oil markets and the other geopolitical issues arising from the continued Ukrainian War IMHO are outweighing the short term benefit of weakening the Russian Federation
Ending the war soon will not fix all of those issues I listed or others but would likely considerably ameliorate them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pawnman]

[Stoker]

On 9/19/2023 at 8:40 AM, ClearedHot said:

KIA: 372,093

WIA: 508,474

Total Casualties: 880,567

 

That’s in 18 months. The US lost 420,000 in 4 years of WWII.  Very sobering.

 

 

And the countries taking massive casualties in WW2 had far healthier demographic structures at the time. This war is the end of Russia for practical purposes. Lose half a million young men you absolutely cannot spare, cripple another half million, and drive another million to flee the country (and those fleeing are probably the best educated), and combine that with crippling demographic echoes from WW2 and the fall of the USSR... they're toast.

It doesn't help that the Russian government views a large and growing portion of its population (anyone not ethnic Russian) as not real Russians.

[waveshaper]

2 hours ago, Stoker said:

2 hours ago, Stoker said:

And the countries taking massive casualties in WW2 had far healthier demographic structures at the time. This war is the end of Russia for practical purposes. Lose half a million young men you absolutely cannot spare, cripple another half million, and drive another million to flee the country (and those fleeing are probably the best educated), and combine that with crippling demographic echoes from WW2 and the fall of the USSR... they're toast.

It doesn't help that the Russian government views a large and growing portion of its population (anyone not ethnic Russian) as not real Russians.

Repost: Something to think about, both Russia and the Ukraine can take some serious casualties. The top three countries with the most casualties during WW2 = China, Russia, and Ukraine. Note - broken down by country not USSR, etc/keep in mind all these countries had a much smaller population during WW2.

List of casualties from top 8 countries during WW2:

Country	Tot. Deaths	Military Deaths	Civ. Deaths via Military	Civ. Deaths via Famine/Disease
China	20,000,000	3,750,000	8,191,000	10,000,000
Russia	13,950,000	6,750,000	4,100,000	3,100,000
Ukraine	6,850,000	1,650,000	3,700,000	1,500,000
Poland	6,000,000	240,000	5,820,000
Germany	5,700,000	4,456,000	2,135,000
Japan	3,100,000	2,300,000	800,000
India	3,087,000	87,000		3,000,000
Belarus	2,290,000	620,000	1,360,000	310,000

Complete list: World War II Casualties by Country 2022 (worldpopulationreview.com)

 

[frog]

3 hours ago, Stoker said:

 

It doesn't help that the Russian government views a large and growing portion of its population (anyone not ethnic Russian) as not real Russians.

Source? Not quibbling, just interested.

[arg]

The Clintons want to get themselves some of that money.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bill-clinton-global-foundation-pandemic-ukraine-russia-war

https://thehill.com/policy/international/4209624-clinton-global-initiative-launching-network-to-provide-humanitarian-aid-to-ukrainians/

[FourFans]

Of course the Clinton's do Humanitarian Aid.  Who do you think was hired to take care of Prigozhin?

[Lawman]

Of course the Clinton's do Humanitarian Aid.  Who do you think was hired to take care of Prigozhin?

I think you guys are overthinking the real reasons Ol’Billy wants to do this…






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk