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.
Yeah I agree. Right in the video he admits he has been wrong in the past. So you have to take what he says with a grain of salt. The fact is that right now the war is in a stalemate. Actually the Russians seem to be making some gains, very small gains. But everyday they seem to be taking control of another village. Which is nothing too much to worry about. At that rate it would still take them years maybe decades to win the war.
The real question is, will the US give the Ukraine, the better weapons and training they need to win the war. If we give it to them, they will win. If we don't, then the war will go on for a very long time, until one side or the other gets worn down.
I'm curious because I've heard this line muttered on many occasions. What are the weapons and training they need to win the war? So far, we have supplied heavy artilleries, rocket launchers, anti-ship missiles, anti-radiation missiles, anti-tank missiles, missile defense systems, and various other types of advanced weaponry and defense systems. In addition, we are providing first class intel telling them where to aim the weapons and informing them of Russian movements and likely strategy. Aircraft is the only thing missing, but I have my doubts on how affective they would be, considering their major airports were bombed limiting from where they can take off. How would you coordinate the launch of a squadron? What else is there left to provide short of nuclear weapons. I don’t understand. Afghanistan and Vietnam were able to drive out invaders with far less capable weaponry and much less foreign intelligence.
I am convinced that the assassination of the Russian journalist was carried out by Russia to justify more brutality against Ukrainians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidt1
Ukraine denied involvement in the assassination. I believe them because they would not be that stupid to assassinate civilians on Russian soil.
Killing Dugin won't have any effect on Russian military strategy and execution. Dugin is a controversial figure in Russia. What exactly do you think is going to happen? Nuke Kiev? Rofl.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307
Most demographers believe Russia will never have another chance to expand and view Ukraine as a now-or-never situation.
Putin never wanted to invade Ukraine. Had there been no coup or had America not tried to push NATO into Ukraine, there would be no war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz
Which is nothing too much to worry about. At that rate it would still take them years maybe decades to win the war.
On the line of contact, Ukraine has large numbers of troops. When one dies, they plug the hole. At some point Ukraine will run out of soldiers to plug the hole and Russia will pour through.
As for weapon transfers to Ukraine, what else should we give them? We could give them more himars, but we don't have enough rockets. We could send everything we have, but what if Russia destroys it all? Most of the stuff we give them never sees combat.
Russian occupation officials in Zaporizhia Oblast have obliquely declared the region’s independence from Ukraine by falsely identifying Ukrainian citizens entering the occupied region as temporary asylum seekers
Head of the Zaporizhia Oblast occupation administration Yevheny Balitsky signed an order that designates Ukrainian citizens arriving in occupied Zaporizhia Oblast as temporary asylum seekers based on Russian law.[1] The order requires the registration of Ukrainian and Russian citizens based on their place of residence or place of arrival in the Russian-occupied parts of Zaporizhia Oblast and requires the distribution of temporary identification forms for all “stateless persons.” Ukrainians and Russians may register if they present proof of their temporary asylum application. This decree has various implications under both international law and domestic Russian law. International law states that a refugee is an individual from outside the country (or who is stateless) who is seeking “temporary asylum” in another country to escape persecution.[2] Russian law defines a refugee as a person ”who is outside of his/her country of nationality or habitual residence.”[3] Neither of these statuses properly apply to the majority of people crossing from unoccupied Ukraine into occupied Zaporizhia.
Russian occupation authorities are thus falsely classifying all Ukrainians entering occupied territories in Zaporizhia Oblast as refugees escaping persecution in Ukraine.
Key Takeaways
Quote:
Russian-backed occupation authorities in Zaporizhia Oblast have obliquely declared the independence of the occupied areas of the oblast by falsely identifying Ukrainian citizens entering from unoccupied Ukraine as temporary asylum seekers.
Russian forces conducted localized spoiling attacks southwest and southeast of Izyum.
Russian forces continued ground attacks southeast of Siversk and northeast and south of Bakhmut.
Russian forces continued attempts to advance from the northern and western outskirts of Donetsk City and conducted limited ground attacks southwest of Donetsk City.
Russian forces made marginal gains along the Mykolaiv-Kherson line.
Ukrainian intelligence stated that the Luhansk People’s Republic (LNR) will start “general mobilization” processes on September 1.
Prymorsky Krai announced the formation of a new repair and service volunteer battalion.
Ukrainian partisans continued to conduct attacks against Russian forces in occupied Melitopol.
Activity in Russian-occupied Areas
Quote:
Ukrainian civilians attacked a Russian soldier in occupied Melitopol overnight on August 21-22. Footage of the aftermath shows Russian soldiers carrying an injured soldier on a stretcher away from a crowd on the street.[61] Ukraine's Resistance Center reported that Ukrainian partisans attacked a Russian soldier who harassed an underage girl but did not specify the method or result of the attack.[62] Ukrainian sources also reported explosions and gunfire throughout Melitopol overnight on August 21-22.[63] Ukraine's Resistance Center reported that Ukrainian resistance activity is actively inhibiting occupation authorities’ efforts to set conditions for a referendum in Kherson Oblast, causing unspecified preparation efforts in Henichensk, Kherson Oblast to fail
We use nationalists when it serves US interests. We use Islamic fundamentalists when it serves US interests. We use communists when it serves US interests. We overthrow democracies when it serves US interests. We support genocide when it serves US interests. The United States has no principles. We only care about power.
Who said anything about Russia being a positive force? They don't have to be good to be useful.
"There are no morals in politics; there is only expedience. A scoundrel may be of use to us just because he is a scoundrel." - Vladimir Lenin
Take your understanding of the Machiavellian/Darwinian nature of geopolitics, write down your goals on a piece of paper, then create a flowchart that adheres to human-nature, but which would take us from where we are now to where you want us to go.
Or better yet, just tell me how Russia collapsing benefits you over the long-run?
That's true to a great extent , though I still think that the US establishment ( along with all other globalist forces ) is very much committed to spreading what's referred to as capitalism ( I personally dislike using that term ) as well as democracy and cosmopolitan ideology throughout the world , even if it does indeed ally itself with forces very much at odds with those systems/concepts .
The thing is that I don't in the least have a Machiavellian/Darwinian view of things , in fact as a traditionalist conservative such a worldview is quite repugnant to me , which is why I cannot adopt such a way of thinking even if dipping into such sort of analysis is useful for the purpose of understanding certain issues from time to time .
To answer your question though , the present day Russian Federation collapsing would be beneficial from my point of view if it was to be replaced with a rejuvenated Tsardom , on the throne of which would sit a member of Prince Karl Emich of Leiningen's family or one of their relations :
Having traditionalist minded ethnic Germans raised outside of the FSU sit on the throne of Russia could quite easily pave the way for an entirely different sort of Russia , one that would be cut off from its Byzantine Caesaropapist/Mongol influenced political culture , along with the dreadful Soviet/democratic/silovik influenced one that reigns today .
It would be a constitutional monarchy without any imperialist pretensions , one that would officially apologize for all wrongdoings committed by the Russian state in all its manifestations in the past , and would also offer to participate in a peaceful resettlement scheme aimed at bringing back all ethnic Russians living in the Baltic states to live once again on Russian soil .
It could much more easily solve the ongoing conflict with Ukraine via coming up with a treaty along the lines of what I've described elsewhere and perhaps even restore the Cossack Hetmanate of old , which would be an essentially independent buffer state between both Russia and Ukraine , and a major outpost of traditionalist Slavdom .
After some time maybe even the issue of reuniting the Orthodox world with the Church of Rome could be broached , though a similarly ground changing revolution would obviously have to occur within the Catholic Church itself for that to work out , but I'm probably getting ahead of myself .
In short I very much resent this tragic godforsaken war as yet another blow against the peoples of the Occident , who are needlessly slaughtering each other and hurting the cause of tradition , while the forces of anti tradition ( which I see the Russian Federation as part of ) laugh .
Killing Dugin won't have any effect on Russian military strategy and execution. Dugin is a controversial figure in Russia. What exactly do you think is going to happen? Nuke Kiev? Rofl.
Putin never wanted to invade Ukraine. Had there been no coup or had America not tried to push NATO into Ukraine, there would be no war.
On the line of contact, Ukraine has large numbers of troops. When one dies, they plug the hole. At some point Ukraine will run out of soldiers to plug the hole and Russia will pour through.
As for weapon transfers to Ukraine, what else should we give them? We could give them more himars, but we don't have enough rockets. We could send everything we have, but what if Russia destroys it all? Most of the stuff we give them never sees combat.
Lots of holes in your post....
Putin never wanted to invade Ukraine.....
Ukrainian soldiers die ...they will run out of soldiers...hmmm...Russian soldiers don't
die?....and there is a never ending supply of trained Russian soldiers anyway...sure
We can supply more HIMARS but "we don't have a enough rockets"...and you know that
because .....you work at the Pentagon....
Then you state "what if Russia destroys it all?"....hmmm...maybe make more
WWI was caused by a Serbian nationalist shooting Archduke Franz Ferdinand. In what way was the war caused by a dispute over land?
Please tell me you don't believe that. A Serb nationalist killing an extremely unpopular boor of an archduke would have been an unremarkable footnote in history, had not Austria-Hungary seized the opportunity to start a war for the purpose of - anyone? - yes, for the purpose of grabbing some land from Serbia.
Then Serbia called on their ally Russia, Austria-Hungary called on their ally Germany, Russia tried and failed to partially mobilize and instead just - mobilized. Germany mobilized, France mobilized, Schlieffen Plan couldn't be changed, Germany pushed west to get some more land, Belgium was allied with Britain, yadayadayada.
If you want understand events of this sort, don't look at the spark. Look at the powder keg.
Technically true. It's the wifebeater excuse. If Ukraine had agreed to be an obedient little puppet state like Belarus, Putin would not have had to be so rough. It's Ukraine's fault for thinking they get to make their own decisions as a country, really. They should know what he gets like.
He didn't want to hurt them, he just wanted them to do what they were told.
Please tell me you don't believe that. A Serb nationalist killing an extremely unpopular boor of an archduke would have been an unremarkable footnote in history, had not Austria-Hungary seized the opportunity to start a war for the purpose of - anyone? - yes, for the purpose of grabbing some land from Serbia.
Then Serbia called on their ally Russia, Austria-Hungary called on their ally Germany, Russia tried and failed to partially mobilize and instead just - mobilized. Germany mobilized, France mobilized, Schlieffen Plan couldn't be changed, Germany pushed west to get some more land, Belgium was allied with Britain, yadayadayada.
If you want understand events of this sort, don't look at the spark. Look at the powder keg.
Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you , but are you implying that Austria-Hungary was the sole aggressor in their dispute with Serbia ?
Because that is as great of an exaggeration as stating the opposite , which brings me to the very much relevant point of cartoonish depictions of good and bad actors being at the root of why this particular ongoing war has started/is dragging on for so long .
Until all parties involved admit that both Russia and Ukraine ( along with the West ) bear responsibility for the emergence of this conflict , then it will be almost certain that the practice of all parties digging in their heels till the final bloody end comes to pass will hold fast , which won't be good for either parties in the long run especially not Ukraine even if it does end up " winning " the war .
I'm curious because I've heard this line muttered on many occasions. What are the weapons and training they need to win the war? So far, we have supplied heavy artilleries, rocket launchers, anti-ship missiles, anti-radiation missiles, anti-tank missiles, missile defense systems, and various other types of advanced weaponry and defense systems. In addition, we are providing first class intel telling them where to aim the weapons and informing them of Russian movements and likely strategy. Aircraft is the only thing missing, but I have my doubts on how affective they would be, considering their major airports were bombed limiting from where they can take off. How would you coordinate the launch of a squadron? What else is there left to provide short of nuclear weapons. I don’t understand. Afghanistan and Vietnam were able to drive out invaders with far less capable weaponry and much less foreign intelligence.
Afghanistan and Vietnam were able to hold out for years and saw the outside nations that were sending in many cases conscripted troops their way finally give up and leave. There was no running commentary from outside defense ministries tracking daily stalemates on the frontlines to entertain us. With commentators wondering why this war isn't over like say a six day war.
In fact the parties in charge of the leadership of those nations that first invaded, in France, the United States and the Soviet Union, were often thrown out of office before the replacement leaders finally withdrew the troops.
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.
