Military observations on Ukraine invasion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

The opposite happened in Afghanistan, though. Both there and here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are Russian generals getting killed?

Because people with rifles are shooting at them.


So much for the “you can’t fight a modern army with your silly AR15” meme, huh?

This is 100% true. And after Ukraine, it cannot be refuted.

Well, it can because it’s clear after Ukraine that Russia doesn’t have a “modern army.”

Please tell us how an army - any army, modern or not - can occupy territory with a local population that is armed, angry, and shooting at them 24hrs a day.

I spent half my 30’s deployed in OEF and OIF. The ONLY reason we were able to occupy those nations was because only a tiny, tiny fraction of the population was a combatant. Most of the people didn’t actively HATE us…..But if even 10% of the Afghans or Iraqis had picked up a rifle and taken a shot at us whenever one presented itself, we’d have had the same outcome the Russians are having right now.

You *cannot* occupy territory where an armed population is resisting you in significant numbers. Period. The only solution in that scenario is to depopulate the area of all civilian personnel capable of resisting. Something the US has never done - because we haven’t needed to.

[Anonymous]

The notoriously effective French Foreign legion, the lesser known Spanish Foreign legion, and many others are now joined by the 20,000 man Ukrainian foreign legion:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/14/russia-ukraine-war-international-legion-foreign-fighters

Anyone remember Ernest Hemingway? He joined the Marxist side in the Spanish civil war. Then there were the famous Flying Tigers - mostly US pilots fighting fascism before Pearl Harbor.

This current phenomenon is not novel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

Russia does not have that many young people to spare. This is not 1914, nor is it 1939 for Russia:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

Russia does not have that many young people to spare. This is not 1914, nor is it 1939 for Russia:

And now, they have even fewer.

On the positive side, they've lost so much military equipment and used so many munitions, lost so many planes and vehicles that they could have a boom in defense manufacturing, when this is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

Russia does not have that many young people to spare. This is not 1914, nor is it 1939 for Russia:

And now, they have even fewer.

On the positive side, they've lost so much military equipment and used so many munitions, lost so many planes and vehicles that they could have a boom in defense manufacturing, when this is over.

On the other hand, their seized foreign reserves are going to be used to rebuild Ukraine, and they'll have to find another way to fund it.

[Anonymous]

Get it from the oligarchs that took all the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Get it from the oligarchs that took all the money.

The west - mostly Western Europe - has seized mega yachts. My guess is the apartments and villas in the EU are next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

Russia does not have that many young people to spare. This is not 1914, nor is it 1939 for Russia:

And now, they have even fewer.

On the positive side, they've lost so much military equipment and used so many munitions, lost so many planes and vehicles that they could have a boom in defense manufacturing, when this is over.

Right now would be THE time for China to go after Siberia.

The ChiComs don’t refer to Siberia/eastern Russia as “The Northern Resource Area” for nothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Russian Major General slain

I wonder how they are killing these high ranking officers.

They are intercepting their calls and geolocatiing them. Apparently Russian secure communication ERA system does not work so Russian army communicating on not secure lines.

Russia is an incompetent mess where it comes to fighting a real war, they are only good at brutal indiscriminate shelling and bombing of civilian targets, and the idiotic trolls here supporting them should be ashamed.

Except no one here is supporting them.

But your poor, blatant attempt at gaslighting is noted.

MTG is...

Cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Get it from the oligarchs that took all the money.

The west - mostly Western Europe - has seized mega yachts. My guess is the apartments and villas in the EU are next.

And? These people would’ve moved their wealth to the Middle East which is welcoming them with open arms. One piddling yacht or villa isn’t going to affect anyone’s bottom line.

[Anonymous]

Comically bad ground movements/formation and firearm safety by the Russian infantry lol

https://www.instagram.com/tv/CbOMcespEGi/?utm_medium=copy_link

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

Russia does not have that many young people to spare. This is not 1914, nor is it 1939 for Russia:

And now, they have even fewer.

On the positive side, they've lost so much military equipment and used so many munitions, lost so many planes and vehicles that they could have a boom in defense manufacturing, when this is over.

So build more stuff that will not work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The notoriously effective French Foreign legion, the lesser known Spanish Foreign legion, and many others are now joined by the 20,000 man Ukrainian foreign legion:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/14/russia-ukraine-war-international-legion-foreign-fighters

Anyone remember Ernest Hemingway? He joined the Marxist side in the Spanish civil war. Then there were the famous Flying Tigers - mostly US pilots fighting fascism before Pearl Harbor.

This current phenomenon is not novel.

The sides were the Republicans(Spanish government together with unions, communists, anarchists, workers, and peasants) vs the Nationalists(rebel part of the army, the bourgeoisie, the landlords, and, generally, the upper classes). There was no Marxist side. Just the government side vs the coup leaders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't see any evidence to support this possible scenario, but I'm curious what others think: is there a chance that Putin actually wants to draw NATO into Ukraine in order to ignite a broader conflict? Perhaps, so far, he has been fighting with one arm behind his back, and he will only swing with both fists once NATO forces enter Ukraine. Additionally, with NATO deployed in Ukraine, is there a risk that China would then enter the conflict, fighting alongside of Russia?

Putin absolutely wants to draw NATO in so he can strengthen his domestic position within Russia. The "woe is us, NATO is so mean to Russia" narrative plays very well domestically but he really can't deploy that narrative effectively when Russia is just shelling civilians in the Ukraine.

China absolutely will NOT put boots on the ground to fight alongside Russians. Their best case scenario is to sit back and watch Russia and the Western democracies destroy each other.

I think your logic makes sense. If Putin draws NATO into the war, it will galvanize the Russian population, and perhaps, he hopes, mask the fact that the Russians are indeed the bad guys in this conflict.

Conversely, if NATO remains on the sidelines, then, ultimately, there is a possibility that an ever-larger percentage of the Russian population will break free from the propaganda and develop an understanding of the horrible truth. And that would potentially lead to the downfall of Putin.

The only way a stable outcome can be achieved, I think, is if Putin is removed from power and a benign regime takes over. If Putin remains in power, any post-war "peace" will be quite tense -- perhaps similar to the tension that exists on the Korean peninsula, with two diametrically opposed societies on opposite sides of a lengthy, highly militarized border.

Or, the longer this drags on, then more Russian soldiers will die in Ukraine, enraging their families and increasing their support to cause destruction in Ukraine.

Russia does not have that many young people to spare. This is not 1914, nor is it 1939 for Russia:

And now, they have even fewer.

On the positive side, they've lost so much military equipment and used so many munitions, lost so many planes and vehicles that they could have a boom in defense manufacturing, when this is over.

So build more stuff that will not work?

I’m really starting to wonder if they’ve designed all their armor and vehicles to resist/defeat their own weapons?

The way those turrets have been flying off T-80’s and T-90’s makes me think this is the case.