Ukrainian victory over Russia is inevitable
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
I mean, completely unrelated to the thread, but LOL!!! Are you that stupid? |
Anonymous
LOL so people say the Russian army is poorly supplied, poorly commanded, obsolete and fighting with wooden sticks and basically a second away from collapsing. AND They are about to invade the Baltics and Poland, NATO MEMBERS, with this supposedly ragtag army. Hmmmm.. One of these things doesn't fit. Also, you should know that the French, the Spanish, the Italian, the German etc. do not at all feel threatened by this mythical Russian invasion. "All of Europe", suuure. |
Anonymous
| Russian forces additionally likely lack the mechanized forces necessary to advance beyond Bakhmut, and the tactical “assault detachments” used in assaults against Bakhmut are likely unable to conduct maneuver warfare. Recent Russian advances within urban areas of Bakhmut demonstrate that Russian forces can secure limited tactical gains with infantry-led frontal assaults. Russian forces likely lack the mechanized forces necessary to exploit the roads (which are likely highly fortified) west of Bakhmut. As recently reported, Russian forces are increasingly relying on “assault detachments,” a battalion-size element optimized for frontal assaults on fortified areas, rather than for maneuver warfare. These detachments are artillery-heavy, use simplified tactics, relegate tanks to a fire support role in rear areas, and would almost certainly struggle to effectively conduct operations beyond urban areas. A prominent Russian milblogger echoed this observation on March 7, noting that assault detachments are simply too small to “punch a wide and deep gap” in Ukrainian defensive formations and follow with tank and mechanized battalions, and called for the formation of “breakthrough brigades,” a change likely far beyond the current capabilities of Russian forces in the area. The continuing devolution of Russian force structure towards small assault detachments using simplified tactics, combined with mounting losses among the most effective Russian troops, will likely greatly limit the ability of Russian forces to properly exploit any paths of advance opened by the capture of Bakhmut Russian forces remain unlikely to secure more than a tactical victory following 10 months of assaults. |
Anonymous
Ask Russia why they keep explicitly threatening Poland, the Baltics, etc. I agree that it doesn't make any logical sense because they dont have either the capacity or capability to do so. Nevertheless they keep making the threats. |
Anonymous
People say all kinds of things; doesn't mean it's true. Remember that in 2008 Putin could have very easily overtaken Tbilisi yet chose not to. |
Anonymous
Go away, Russian troll. Nobody here is buying what you're selling. |
Anonymous
Don’t believe everything you read . This was a poorly sourced story citing intelligence officials and has been widely ridiculed |
Anonymous
There are many layers of complexity, for example starting with the fact that Putin has for years surrounded himself with legions of yes-men who tell him whatever he wants to hear; there are his "friends" - the oligarchs who promised to "help" him but in turn just enriched themselves by stealing money intended for maintaining Russian military equipment, training personnel and other vital functions. It is in fact both true that Putin earnestly believed that he could conquer Ukraine in 3 days yet not understand that this was in fact not true. |
Anonymous
There is an old Russian movie called the Twelve Chairs which takes place in the years after the revolution (the premise is someone held the family jewels in an upholstered chair that was part of a set of 12 and he is desperately hunting across the USSR to find the chair). Anyway, there is a scene in which he finds a room labeled something like “The People’s orchestra of the victorious hero workers” —when he opens the door, it is one guy with a sad old tuba — because everything else has been stolen through grift. All name, no instruments. As it ever was in Russia. Oddly, Mel brooks made a remake of that same movie! |
Anonymous
| So who blew up Nordstream now? Some Ukrainian guys but not with zelensky authoriAtion? |
Anonymous
I don’t think we will ever know. There is “low confidence” intelligence that it is operatives aligned with Ukraine, likely with former special operations training. Frankly it sounds like someone paid ex-SEALS to do the dirty work. There are supposedly 40+ boats that passed through the area with their homing beacons purposely disabled. I’ve always thought it was done by oligarchs disgruntled with Putin. Alternatively it could have been done by Ukrainian oligarchs/nationalists without Zalensky’s approval. Two groups with the same objective. Either way, the move was pretty critical in forcing Europe closer to Ukraine. And Scholz is dirty dirty dirty, so the Ukrainians knew he couldn’t be trusted, so they forced his hand. |
Anonymous
Even if these teams could technically pull off the demolition, doing it under NATO's noses is another matter. NATO either turned a blind eye to this, gave permission or doesn't have anywhere near the monitoring capability it claims. |
Anonymous
It's pretty obvious that whoever did it had access to state level resources. Explosives, expertise, divers, planning AND making it happen in the heavily trafficked areas where discovery was a real possibility. Do not tell me there was no government level cooperation in this, that's BS. What's obvious is that the initial knee-jerk response "it's Putin's fault!" is wrong since not a shred of evidence points at Russia. The other interesting thing is that no one is talking about accountability. I mean if an American pipeline got blown up, you can be sure someone would call it an act of terrorism. |
Anonymous
|
For the MAGAs, Putin was clearly afraid of Trump, right? Right? And that's why they didn't decide to invade under his administration. Or as Trump just acknowledged, he'd just hand over parts of Ukraine to Russia:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/03/09/donald-trump-have-let-putin-annex-ukraine-end-war/ |
Anonymous
One obvious theory would look at who benefits from Europe's alternative purchasing sources. Clearly that guy had a major interest in cutting out the competitors, wouldn't you say so? |