Jump to content

Ukraine: Slava Ukraini!!!


Ser Scot A Ellison

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, mcbigski said:

The risk/reward ratio is decidedly skewed against the typical rifleman or medic though.

Hey what your reaction to the story of the 7 year old who got gang raped and then dumped in a mass grave by Russian troops?

Do you think the risk of their children being taken, raped, and killed is why there’s so little appetite amongst Ukrainians to cede territory in the name of peace?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may well have happened.  That is the state of things when war descends.  Though the odds of Our Side doing something like that are marked higher than the odds of the same getting reported and boosted in social media.

Only winning move is not to play.  Especially when it's outsiders forcing the conflict to feed the military industrial complex.  

Do you think Ukrainians prefer one illegitimate leader to another so much that they're willing to get their children taken raped and killed?  I would think most people would put their children first, but billionaire owned media companies have a lot of financial incentive to push alternative narratives.

Do you think that most Ukrainian parents would rather support arms dealers or have their children taken, raped and killed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

It may well have happened.  That is the state of things when war descends.  Though the odds of Our Side doing something like that are marked higher than the odds of the same getting reported and boosted in social media.

Only winning move is not to play.  Especially when it's outsiders forcing the conflict to feed the military industrial complex.  

Do you think Ukrainians prefer one illegitimate leader to another so much that they're willing to get their children taken raped and killed?  I would think most people would put their children first, but billionaire owned media companies have a lot of financial incentive to push alternative narratives.

Do you think that most Ukrainian parents would rather support arms dealers or have their children taken, raped and killed?

So… surrender to the rapists/murderers and hope they’re nicer than people think?  That’s your plan?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So… surrender to the rapists/murderers and hope they’re nicer than people think?  That’s your plan?

 

I don't think the best way to protect the next generation is to engage in nuclear brinksmanship, but my net worth isn't reliant on defense company stocks.  And as large as I am in person, no one is kicking 10% to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

It may well have happened.

It did.

25 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Only winning move is not to play. 

Really showing that American conservative freedom loving spirit eh?

25 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Especially when it's outsiders forcing the conflict to feed the military industrial complex.  

I’m 100% sure you’d blame some European great power  for the rowdinesses of the colonists and cry for the colonists to stay behold to Britian.

25 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

Do you think Ukrainians prefer one illegitimate leader

Have you cared to look up any of the actual polling on what they believe or want?

Zelensky has approval of 80+ % and over 90:of Ukrainians don’t want to cede any territory for the sake of “peace”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

don't think the best way to protect the next generation is to engage in nuclear brinksmanship,

Jesus Christ you were just in one of these threads howling on how Putin’s invasion of Ukraine was an inevitably of Biden’s weakness and now you’re shitting your pants at the thought upsetting Putin by helping Ukrainians stop the fascist takeover of their country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, mcbigski said:

I don't think the best way to protect the next generation is to engage in nuclear brinksmanship, but my net worth isn't reliant on defense company stocks.  And as large as I am in person, no one is kicking 10% to me.

So… if your opponent is a pack of rapists and murderers who also possess nuclear weapons your plan is to surrender and hope real hard they are nicer than reported?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Werthead said:

They were Su-27s, which I suspect would last about 0.3 seconds in a dogfight against an F-35, so yeah, a mistake or a particularly elaborate form of suicide.

I wouldn't be so sure. Actually, the Su-27 would probably win. The F-35 isn't supposed to get into dogfights and isn't very good at it. The F-22 is a different story. Ars Technica had a story on it a while ago.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/04/sitrep-is-the-f-35-now-officially-a-failure/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

"Give Russia what they want because they might use nukes if we don't" is no better for international peace and security than, "we can't let Russia have what they want just because they've got nukes"

In fact it would make the world a far more dangerous place, as more leaders would be emboldened to threaten to use nukes.

I’m pretty puzzled by the attitude of some American “Conservatives” who want Russia to be the gendarme of Eastern Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, SeanF said:

In fact it would make the world a far more dangerous place, as more leaders would be emboldened to threaten to use nukes.

 

Only if we stop appeasing them. As long as we keep letting them get what they want everything will continue to be fine...right? We only have to do that until climate change ruins everything, so it'll only be a decade or two and we'll have nothing else to worry about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SeanF said:

I’m pretty puzzled by the attitude of some American “Conservatives” who want Russia to be the gendarme of Eastern Europe.

Part of the clue, is that they don't live in Eastern Europe; or Western Europe, for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, mcbigski said:

It's not important that the tanks are effective.  Sure it looks better PR wise, but the important thing is getting more defense appropriations.

War is great if you're a Senator or defense contractor.  The risk/reward ratio is decidedly skewed against the typical rifleman or medic though.

Dude, I am down with flu like symptoms, headaches, nausea, so my generally low amount of patience I have with qnuts is even lower, so I'll say that as politely as possible. I am not interested in some big conspiracy, that this is all about the US using Ukrainians to line the pockets of US arm manufacturers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alarich II said:

Well, the Ukrainians have a legitimate government. And they want to keep it that way. 

No no no, you don't get it. Any election whose results @mcbigski doesn't like was obviously stolen and illegitimate. Even when it was won by the opposition candidate without access to levers of power.

Ironically, Zelenski won his election mostly by being a moderate alternative to Poroshenko who promised peace and compromise with Russia, and he spent the entire early part of his mandate fruitlessly attempting to talk to Putin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gorn said:

No no no, you don't get it. Any election whose results @mcbigski doesn't like was obviously stolen and illegitimate. Even when it was won by the opposition candidate without access to levers of power.

Ironically, Zelenski won his election mostly by being a moderate alternative to Poroshenko who promised peace and compromise with Russia, and he spent the entire early part of his mandate fruitlessly attempting to talk to Putin.

That certainly seems to be mcbigski’s schtick now.  

The thing about Zelenskyy that is sad is Tankies and QNuts will scream to high heaven that Zelenskyy betrayed his promises because Ukraine is successfully resisting the Russian invasion under his leadership.  

The QNuts and Tankies always forget or gloss over that it is Russia that chose to invade Ukraine last February.  Russia made Zelenskyy into a wartime President without his permission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just listened to Stephen Sears The Landscape Turned Red about the Battle of Antietam and I’m now listening to his book Chanchellorsville.  I’m struck by the discussions of how poorly Union forces were doing in the early parts of the American Civil War and how well the poorly equipped Confederates did.  

It reminds me of of the War in Ukraine.  Could the Russians just be waiting for the right commander?  I sincerely hope that is an empty worry and we will see a Ukrainian victory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, a competent commander would help a little bit - but that's really not how modern warfare works. That worked in the civil war because you don't have a bunch of professional armed forces. You don't have equipment that can take months of training to use. You don't have combined arms of artillery, mobile infantry, air support, recon, intel. 

The modern army does need good top-down leadership which understands capabilities. But you also need a lot of fairly talented lower officers and NCOs who can adapt and change tactics based on terrain, evolving circumstances and opportunities. And you need to be able to trust those people. You need logistics, you need maintenance, you need useful technology. All of those things are improved by command, but they don't go away if you have the next Rommel. 

Honestly, what a good commander for Russia would look like is probably either someone willing to commit massive atrocities at a truly horrific scale or someone who can somehow make 1970s tech and supply chains an advantage. Neither are likely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The British defence secretary suggested today that 97% of the entire current Russian military is currently committed to the Ukrainian theatre, leaving only a mind-boggling 3% in Syria and defending the borders with other countries. Over 50% of all Russian tanks in existence have been destroyed or crippled in the conflict to date.

He also suggested that the entire Russian military's combat effectiveness has been degraded by around 60%, indicating that Russia is, conventionally, half as militarily strong as it was a year ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Werthead said:

The British defence secretary suggested today that 97% of the entire current Russian military is currently committed to the Ukrainian theatre, leaving only a mind-boggling 3% in Syria and defending the borders with other countries. Over 50% of all Russian tanks in existence have been destroyed or crippled in the conflict to date.

He also suggested that the entire Russian military's combat effectiveness has been degraded by around 60%, indicating that Russia is, conventionally, half as militarily strong as it was a year ago.

There are some gas fields I’m sure the Chinese are really interested in examining in the Russian far east…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...