Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Two generals, very different views on the Ukraine crisis
Is it uncharitable to point out that MacGregor is a colonel, not a general (or a four star general as Keane is) and that bird colonels are a dime a dozen and rare is one that doesn't think he knows better than the general he serves?
Quote:
Originally Posted by atxcio
The people who want so badly to believe the Russian propaganda on this board can't be bothered with researching sources or anything.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Ad hominem attacks are the resort of people who are unable to make arguments to refute the arguments made those they attack.
What's your rank?
Which part of what Gen. MacGregor's interview do you disagree and why?
Last edited by snowmountains; 03-22-2022 at 07:51 AM..
So he annexes Ukraine with NATO countries next door.
How is that a solution to his claimed NATO problem?
Historically, the significance of Ukraine had more to do with the geography and topography of Ukraine. Basically, the west end is the choke point. Once an invading force gets past Lutsk, you have a wide open plain all the way up into Russia. Pop open Google Earth and take a look at the topography of Russia's borders with the other NATO nations.
Was this about NATO? Some what. It's a pretense for conflagrations between Russia and the US. That said, The US would not want Russian nuclear warheads in Tijuana any more than Russia wants US warheads in Sumy. For historical reference, read up on the Cuban Missile Crisis.
As far as annexation, Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts (Donbas Region) petitioned Russia to annex them. Russia declined. Russia would prefer that they remain independent. You should review the Minsk Agreements. There is a whole history of Ukraine's civil war that most news organizations have conveniently memory-holed.
A question you should ask, given the Minsk Agreements, how did 65,000 - 70,000 Western Ukrainian forces end up getting surrounded in the Donbas Region at the start of this invasion? Then find the videos from Patrick Lancaster, he has been covering the Donbas Region since 2014. Find his videos from February 17-24th 2022 (just prior to the Russian invasion.)
Ad hominem attacks are the resort of people who are unable to make arguments to refute the arguments made those they attack.
Which part of what Gen. MacGregor's interview do you disagree and why?
Pointing out legitimate differences in rank and accomplishment is not an ad hominem attack.
I've listened to Keane, Petraeus, Giambastiani (ex-NATO Supreme Allied Commander/0-10 Admiral) - via a lengthy Zoom, McMaster and others............not one of them is as dour as MacGregor.
Pain points for Putin:
1. His plan of shock and awe failed.
2. Russian conventional military exposed as much less capable than the west had assumed.
*Didn't take out runways immediately
*Can't fly legitimate close air support
*Regularly outrunning or failing supply lines
*Very high surrender numbers and attempted defections
*6 (maybe 7) dead general officers
*Exceptionally weak non-commissioned officer ranks (pay and conditions are so poor everyone who can quits).
*Calling in mercenaries who have been immediately dispatched
*Several thousand dead soldiers......Komsomolskaya Pravda reported ~10,000 dead and 16,000+ wounded.
Ad hominem attacks are the resort of people who are unable to make arguments to refute the arguments made those they attack.
What's your rank?
Which part of what Gen. MacGregor's interview do you disagree and why?
You mean Col. MacGregor, right?
The President and the US Senate are involved with all promotions to, and within, the General Officer corps (at least in the Army). Not so with the promotion from O5 to O6. It's not an irrelevant distinction, just ask any/every O6 that never got his/her star(s).
The President and the US Senate are involved with all promotions to, and within, the General Officer corps (at least in the Army). Not so with the promotion from O5 to O6. It's not an irrelevant distinction, just ask any/every O6 that never got his/her star(s).
Dude, you can't debate the arguments made in the video can you?
You mean that's not the conversation you have managed to turn it into.
Tomato, tomahto, but it's not just me as you can see by the other posts in this thread.
Why did you intentionally refer to MacGregor as General, when you know he's not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowmountains
Ad hominem attacks are the resort of people who are unable to make arguments to refute the arguments made those they attack.
What's your rank?
Which part of what Gen. MacGregor's interview do you disagree and why?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
