USSR invades Ukraine. (11 Viewers)

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Anyway, with all this talk of Russia turning the tide they've just taken a city for the first time in what, 18 months, and lost 30,000 men and 2,000 tanks/vehicles doing it. Let's not pretend that they're about to blitzkrieg through the rest of Ukraine.

No one has suggested that but the BBC are now suggesting they have more active troops on the ground than at any time since the war started
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
You are suggesting you have some knowledge on how war works - I’m sorry but given most soldiers are on the battlefield at a younger age than you - when at a top 10 university - needed guidance from your father how to vote - it makes you look a bit silly doesn’t it?

You're an absolute freak. A total creep.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Btw , some of us stated very early on this was a war Ukraine could never win .

And they still cannot win

To be fair though, if Ukraine had just rolled over at the start when Russia were heading to Kiev they’d have lost the whole country. Ukraine and the West (whatever the motives) did the right thing to try to repel them.

Putins willingness to throw endless bodies at the war and this being accepted by the Russian public was maybe underestimated though. From what I heard they have lost an estimated 350k soldiers and god knows how many have been injured. In comparison they lost 15k in 10 years in Afghanistan ! Hardly an intelligent strategy but ultimately they’ve got a larger population than Ukraine so eventually if they keep going long enough they’re likely to win 🤷‍♂️
 

SBT

Well-Known Member
How effective have those sanctions been in your considered viewpoint
I mean, if you want my considered viewpoint I’d say it depends what you think the aims of the sanctions were. If the aim was to crash the Russian economy and/or effect regime change then they have clearly been unsuccessful. I assume you’d have been extremely opposed to those aims, which is just as well, as it doesn’t appear to have really been the end goal - instead, in terms of slowing down the Russian war effort, isolating Russia on the international stage, and damaging the long-term prospects of the Russian economy to the extent that future Russian expansionism becomes more difficult, they seem to have been relatively successful, if obviously not a knockout. Russia’s near-term GDP prospects are good, thanks to their reserves and the mobilisation of the military industry, but the makeup of their economy looks a lot less sustainable now than it did in 2021, with reserves ticking down, young educated people either leaving the country or going to the frontlines, and their biggest trade partners pivoting more quickly away from fossil fuels. The currency has devalued, infrastructure has suffered, foreign investment has become exponentially more difficult. Ordinary Russians have largely been unaffected (again, I assume you approve of this), and the immediate growth prospects are good, but the difficulties may have been enough to both slow down/interrupt the invasion of Ukraine, and make any future invasions less desirable. The cost borne by ordinary Europeans especially has been horrendous, so you can make a case that the exercise wasn’t worth it (especially if you don’t believe Putin poses a threat to any capitals west of Kyiv). But in such a febrile environment and wild fears of a potent Russian army (some military experts predicted it could take the whole country within two days), a scenario without sanctions may well have ended up with Putin having too much momentum, land and financial power to let Europe feel truly secure, so they decided that was a price worth paying.

(But you don’t really want a considered viewpoint right, you just want to do the spreadsheet thing of how I believed the economists who expected more dramatic damage to Russia’s economy, to which my response is lol the war didn’t take 48 hours, we were all wrong, so what)
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Donald Trump GIF by Election 2016
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Interesting article from a guy who usually commentates on the US economy and why it’s essential that other nato members, especially around Europe, need to start pulling their fingers out and quick

Whether it’s Donald Trump or Joe Biden, Nato’s in trouble

 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Yeah, but I think we can take that with a pinch of salt. I don't think that is ever going to happen.

Russia aren’t going anywhere. The areas they are in control of our now a total wasteland - Russia will only rebuild if they own these territories - it’s clear it’s beyond hope for Ukraine now to achieve their aims (it was never possible) and now it’s time to concede and negotiate
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Russian officials refuse to let Navalny's mother see her sons body.

I hope Putin dies a horrible, horrible death.
 

Otis

Well-Known Member
Russia aren’t going anywhere. The areas they are in control of our now a total wasteland - Russia will only rebuild if they own these territories - it’s clear it’s beyond hope for Ukraine now to achieve their aims (it was never possible) and now it’s time to concede and negotiate
I did think they could take back some of the Donbas, but the Crimea was always a bridge (no pun intended) too far.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Russian officials refuse to let Navalny's mother see her sons body.

I hope Putin dies a horrible, horrible death.

Emotional irrelevance
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Probably doing her a favour given the likely radioactivity of the body.

They probably can’t get the ice pick out
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
If you say so.

Eliminating your enemies is hardly a new thing is it. I remember the death of Georgi Markov. There is something curiously quaint about it in a way. So John Le Carre.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
So it seems increasingly likely that Ukraine will be at least partly absorbed into Russia at some point. Hopefully the people here who don’t see that as a problem are right and that they don’t voice concerns about any American land grabs in the future.
 

Sick Boy

Well-Known Member
So it seems increasingly likely that Ukraine will be at least partly absorbed into Russia at some point. Hopefully the people here who don’t see that as a problem are right and that they don’t voice concerns about any American land grabs in the future.
How do you envisage Ukraine winning the war, then? Presumably you're in favour of Western troops joining the fight?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
So it seems increasingly likely that Ukraine will be at least partly absorbed into Russia at some point. Hopefully the people here who don’t see that as a problem are right and that they don’t voice concerns about any American land grabs in the future.

If we’re going back to pre WW2 geopolitics LFG. Move Taiwan to somewhere in Utah en masse then bring it, I reckon we win. Also fuck it lets go back in for Calais, solve the small boat problem once and for all.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
How do you envisage Ukraine winning the war, then? Presumably you're in favour of Western troops joining the fight?

Just stopping fucking about and providing enough weapons would be a start. And for the millionth time it’s about making Ukraine strong enough to enter a negotiation without losing their entire country. As well as, you know, decimating a belligerent world powers military using what we’ve got down the back of the sofa.

And there’s a good argument “Western” troops have been in a fight since day one.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
How do you envisage Ukraine winning the war, then? Presumably you're in favour of Western troops joining the fight?
It would need a huge tilting of the scales for sure. I just think it’s a really, really shit state of affairs that we’re going to just write away another country’s right to exist in order to appease a madman.

How did it turn out in the late 30s?
 

Sick Boy

Well-Known Member
Just stopping fucking about and providing enough weapons would be a start. And for the millionth time it’s about making Ukraine strong enough to enter a negotiation without losing their entire country. As well as, you know, decimating a belligerent world powers military using what we’ve got down the back of the sofa.

And there’s a good argument “Western” troops have been in a fight since day one.
I imagine the failed counter-offensive means that there's scepticism amongst Western countries, even if it's not publicly said. Billions of dollars was put towards weapons for it and it achieved next to nothing; it was supposed to have been the turning point in the war.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It would need a huge tilting of the scales for sure. I just think it’s a really, really shit state of affairs that we’re going to just write away another country’s right to exist in order to appease a madman.

How did it turn out in the late 30s?

We sided with a madman who was as bad as Hitler
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I imagine the failed counter-offensive means that there's scepticism amongst Western countries, even if it's not publicly said. Billions of dollars was put towards weapons for it and it achieved next to nothing; it was supposed to have been the turning point in the war.

I mean, that’s war. If people went in expecting certainty that’s on them really. I think what’s really happened is the main backers have had elections and that’s disrupted the flow, plus it took us too long to realise this was a long term thing and start ramping up manufacturing capacity.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top