TURMOIL IN THE UKRAINE / RUSSIA AGGRESSION

[rothschild]

why didn't you provide a link to the sourcing

Here are a couple people I often read & whose knowledge of Russia I trust--

https://x.com/nataliabugayova


https://x.com/JuliaDavisNews

Both of them claimed two years ago that Russia couldn't sustain the conflict. I think it's safe to say that they were dead wrong; meanwhile, the Ukrainian people are left trying to survive the brutal winter with crippled power generation.

I find it reminiscent of Poland being decimated by both the Nazis and the Soviets. A power struggle between two brutal superpowers, and whatever the ultimate outcome is, the Ukrainian people will be the big losers.

BTW, are you aware that the Hoover Institute is a right-wing think tank?

It fully supported Bush and Cheney's efforts to bring "democracy" to Iraq. It is not known for having humanitarian concern. It's interest lies in power politics. The "grand chessboard", as it were, upon which the common folk are merely pawns to be sacrificed for the "greater good".

Thought you might like to know that.

[Duchess]

*face palm* 

[rothschild]

When you're off by two years your knowledge of Russia's military capabilities is negligible.

Have you considered subscribing to Janes Defense Weekly?

[Duchess]

I don't know who Jane's Defense Weekly is, never heard of of it, but I do know that Russia is using men that haven't been trained for battle, they are using tanks from the Cold War, they haven't any modern day warfare "tools" and I know just because it's your opinion doesn't make you right, rothschild. 

[BlueTiki]

Russia has limited resources left and they have brought in North Koreans to die on the battlefield because they are running out of people to fight. 

Russia has nukes.

Just sayin'.

[Duchess]

Russia has nukes.

Just sayin'.

I know, and it's something I've given more than a little thought to because it scares me. 

[rothschild]

I don't know who Jane's Defense Weekly is, never heard of of it, but I do know that Russia is using men that haven't been trained for battle, they are using tanks from the Cold War, they haven't any modern day warfare "tools" and I know just because it's your opinion doesn't make you right, rothschild. 

Of course they're using up old, outdated military hardware, their modern military is centered on missile technology. Ours is still centered on air power, because we're stupid. As for manpower, they have more than enough elite fighters to crush the few remaining pockets of resistance where serious fighting is occurring.

Fun fact about the M1 Abrams tank: it has a jet engine that goes for three hours on a tank of fuel, after which it becomes static artillery waiting to be destroyed. The Russian tanks go for eight hours and don't cost an arm and a leg.

Another fun fact: the Soviet T-34 was the best tank in WWII.

[BigMark]

Except we have better logistics to feed the tank and can travel twice as far in an hour.

[rothschild]

There are only two seasons in a campaign in that neck of the woods, and I have a hunch they're a lot better at coping with the harshness. Regardless of that, tanks are yesterday. Still useful in certain circumstances but far less significant than they once were. If a high-end drone can take out an M1-Abrams, the economics alone are devastating.

We're fucked because of the lack of accountability of senior leadership. As Duchess pointed out, they can't account for the resources they have at their disposal, mostly because they know they don't have to. The same problem exists in Russia and China but they seem to understand the significance of modern technology far better than we do. We'd be in much better shape if the colonels were running the show. The generals are a joke.

[username]

Zelensky met with Trump. Would you like to talk about that? 

There. That's more like it. There's the curmudgeon I know and love.

I felt bad for Zelensky having to do that. I saw some pix and he looked hugely uncomfortable standing there while trump talked about his great relationship with Putin. Goddamn I want to nail that motherfucker with a brick. Mock is the only place left that I can say that and get away with it.

Ukraine lost Back in 2014 when the US and NATO set up shop and began militarizing for the ostensible purpose of "defending democracy". It's gone very, very badly for Ukraine, yet people like you still defend what the West has done. It's like you don't think the results matter, all that matters is "democracy" was defended. The nation has been devastated but goddamn it, democracy was defended! I know you hate Putin but making important decisions on the basis of emotion is ill-advised. Doesn't seem like you appreciate that.

So, do you still want more war, and if so, what do you think it will accomplish aside from more destruction and loss of life?

2014? U mean the U.S. and NATO did some small things after Russia stole Crimea? The nerve. 

Where’s your red line, RC? Should the U.S. abandon NATO? If not, we’re bound to defend Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, now Finland and more (lots of countries share borders with Russia). Ukraine isn’t a fucking toy. It’s a (as u pointed out) mineral rich democracy that borders Russia. If Russia is looking to protect itself (I call bullshit), why didn’t it invade Lithuania or some other region (already NATO members if it’s so worried about NATO on its borders). NATO is there already. I think Putin just wants to return to the glory of the USSR (as he’s said) and since we rolled over on Crimea, he probably expected a similar response. Which Trump might well give him.

[rothschild]

Zelensky met with Trump. Would you like to talk about that? 

There. That's more like it. There's the curmudgeon I know and love.

I felt bad for Zelensky having to do that. I saw some pix and he looked hugely uncomfortable standing there while trump talked about his great relationship with Putin. Goddamn I want to nail that motherfucker with a brick. Mock is the only place left that I can say that and get away with it.

Ukraine lost Back in 2014 when the US and NATO set up shop and began militarizing for the ostensible purpose of "defending democracy". It's gone very, very badly for Ukraine, yet people like you still defend what the West has done. It's like you don't think the results matter, all that matters is "democracy" was defended. The nation has been devastated but goddamn it, democracy was defended! I know you hate Putin but making important decisions on the basis of emotion is ill-advised. Doesn't seem like you appreciate that.

So, do you still want more war, and if so, what do you think it will accomplish aside from more destruction and loss of life?

2014? U mean the U.S. and NATO did some small things after Russia stole Crimea? The nerve. 

Where’s your red line, RC? Should the U.S. abandon NATO? If not, we’re bound to defend Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, now Finland and more (lots of countries share borders with Russia). Ukraine isn’t a fucking toy. It’s a (as u pointed out) mineral rich democracy that borders Russia. If Russia is looking to protect itself (I call bullshit), why didn’t it invade Lithuania or some other region (already NATO members if it’s so worried about NATO on its borders). NATO is there already. I think Putin just wants to return to the glory of the USSR (as he’s said) and since we rolled over on Crimea, he probably expected a similar response. Which Trump might well give him.

My red line goes back to about 2004 when the US began pouring billions of dollars into Ukraine, setting the stage for the "color revolution" that occurred in 2014.

That should be the red line for anyone that values democracy.

[BigMark]

Who is going to pay to repair the infrastructure?

[Duchess]

Frozen Russian assets should pay for it.

[Duchess]

[rothschild]

Frozen Russian assets should pay for it.

They've been sent over to Ukraine to keep the war dragging on indefinitely so that what's left of it's infrastructure can be destroyed.