Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

dustyfalcon122 said:https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidax...h=716f59ac611d

I mean, if you don't count the entire US Pacific Fleet in the equation, then that gap with the Chinese forces just looks way bigger.

I mean, I assume you actually read the headline in that link—it’s in English, so translating it shouldn't be an issue... but fine, since you're struggling, here's the gist:

Yeah, sure, the Chinese navy has more hulls out there than the US Navy. But that's only because their ships are tiny.

As for the actual tech or how advanced their weaponry is? Honestly, let's not even go there for now.

hollowdriver13 said:T-shirts featuring some kind of "Greater Russia" graphic are actually up for sale now 😂

https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/st...C9xf6YlosrAAAA

It’s pretty wild to see what else they think they can just grab from their neighbors. Looking at this image, it feels like a total fever dream.

There's talk about restoring the USSR, and now Shoigu is out there claiming that rebuilding the Soviet Union is the only way to establish peace.

Meanwhile, Arestovych is arguing the opposite side—that the Russian goal right now is just to secure what they've already taken, hoping for a "Minsk 3" scenario and a split similar to North and South Korea.

Sandra Harris2 said:And why would that stop them from investing in Russia, if there's actual interest in their sphere of influence there?

I brought up Putin in the same context because some of the posts here make it seem like he doesn't even need the money.

Alright, let’s not get ahead of ourselves here.

Sure, the Chinese can invest in Russia if they really want to. But—and this is the big "but"—they'll be playing by Russia's rules, or more specifically, Putin's rules.

That means those terms aren't going to be anything close to predatory toward the Russians—especially when we're talking about their bread and butter, like oil and gas. They aren't about to hand over their natural resources on a silver platter.

The near future will show us pretty quickly who actually called it.

Kate Ross8 said:So what's the deal? Does Alexander Lukashenko get absolutely nothing? Just zero? And Orban gets a little slice of Zakarpattia?
Just look at how the Poles are reacting to these Kremlin breadcrumbs.

The thing is, Lukashenko wasn't quite reliable enough—he spent ages playing both sides between the West and Russia. He only finally picked Russia when the protests hit, and then Russia had to send troops into Belarus to bail him out.

Orban will be pretty happy about that, though—there’s a big population of ethnic Ukrainians living right there in Canada.

As for the Poles—it's all "Ukranation" this and that. They claim that once they get into Western Ukraine, everyone is suddenly speaking Polish??? They speak Ukrainian, but since they can't tell the difference between Ukrainian and Polish, they just pretend they can't understand them and claim the Ukrainian language doesn't even exist.

Dmitry Peskov on "liberating" Russian cities

"When reporters pressed him on whether the Kremlin actually supports the liberation of Russian territories within Ukraine, Peskov just pivoted back to his usual script about purging Ukraine of neo-Nazi sentiments.

'The Kremlin supports the idea that Ukraine needs to be liberated from neo-Nazi feelings, and we have to take all the necessary steps through this special military operation to protect the people in the Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics,' Peskov went on, basically explaining away the whole thing.

"Then you've got the President's press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, weighing in on Senator Andrey Kishas' comments regarding the annexation of new territories during the fall parliamentary session. He was giving his take to the press.

'There’s nothing to report yet, but I’ll say this: the residents of those territories get to decide their own fate and speak for their own future—it’s entirely up to them,' he claimed, as if that settles everything.

https://www-gazeta-ru.translate.goog..._x_tr_pto=wapp

https://www-gazeta-ru.translate.goog..._x_tr_pto=wapp

gentleviper62 said:Why on earth would China attack Russia? They’d be throwing away the only real ally they have left. Besides, those massive oil and gas reserves aren't even sitting right on the border with China; they're tucked way up north.

Well, so they don't fall into American hands!
China is actually pretty short on natural resources, and let's face it, American dominance is built entirely on controlling those kinds of assets. Russia has plenty to go around.

I guess you don't need to be a math genius to figure out that equation.

https://twitter.com/olex_scherba/sta...2F2383349.aspx

That "No one will go away" line is just haunting me.

boldotter2 said:Well, so they don't fall into American hands!
China is actually pretty short on natural resources, and let's face it, American dominance is built entirely on controlling those kinds of assets. Russia has plenty to go around.

I guess you don't need to be a math genius to figure out that equation.

Alright, so why don't you explain it to us like we're little kids in elementary school? Just keep it super simple for us—how exactly would China invade and conquer Siberia without the Russians pulling the nuclear trigger if things start going south for them?

wiredtiger8 said:I mean, I assume you actually read the headline in that link—it’s in English, so translating it shouldn't be an issue... but fine, since you're struggling, here's the gist:

Yeah, sure, the Chinese navy has more hulls out there than the US Navy. But that's only because their ships are tiny.

As for the actual tech or how advanced their weaponry is? Honestly, let's not even go there for now.

My main takeaway is that China is still holding its own against the Americans in the Pacific.
Actually, they're at a point where generals have openly admitted they aren't even sure if they could stop an invasion of Taiwan.

wiredtiger8 said:Alright, so why don't you explain it to us like we're little kids in elementary school? Just keep it super simple for us—how exactly would China invade and conquer Siberia without the Russians pulling the nuclear trigger if things start going south for them?

It's pretty much like what happened when Russia took over Crimea. There are already huge groups of people living along the borders and scattered around, so even the Russians don't really know how many Chinese citizens are actually inside Russia. So, you're basically saying they'd just hold those "legitimate" referendums—kind of like the ones in Crimea—where they set up these "people's republics" that then somehow justify joining up with China.

As for the regular military stuff... man, the invasion of Ukraine has absolutely wrecked their resources. It's gotten so bad they're out here making up tall tales about drugged-up Supersoldiers from Ukraine (I guess someone probably watched Supersoldier starring Jean-Claude Van Damme or something). But China? They have over a billion people. For them, sending a conventional force all the way to the Ural mountains wouldn't even be a struggle. And honestly, casualties are relative; losing 30k soldiers means next to nothing to them compared to the size of their actual invasion force.

Sure, Russia could always pull the nuclear option, but would you really do that just to grab more territory for China? Especially using those "legitimate" referendums as an excuse?

Sandra Harris2 said:https://twitter.com/olex_scherba/sta...2F2383349.aspx

That "No one will go away" line is just haunting me.

Think about those people who were forcibly taken to Russia 😢 For them, there's no way out now. Back when things were at their worst in Pittsburgh, during the height of the fighting, they locked everything down. Nothing could get into the city. It was the Russian military in control, not some local militia. All aid coming from Birmingham was completely blocked. It was a total humanitarian disaster—and since communications were cut, nobody knew what was happening. People were scrambling to find any scrap of internet access they could. Later, they found out the situation in the city was even worse and that Pittsburgh had been named a Hero City. Some folks did manage to sneak in help—food, water, medicine—and helped with evacuations. But then, those very people were arrested. It’s the same pattern as when they refused to let civilians escape through corridors. Eventually, they'd roam the streets claiming Washington, D.C. had fallen, or that Washington, D.C. didn't want anyone from Pittsburgh—that everyone should just head to Russia instead. When the UN was involved back in May, they gave people an address where the UN would be. Then they changed the location, leaving people wandering street to street. In the end, they basically mocked them, saying they'd sent the UN somewhere else entirely, and told people they could either stay in the city or go to Russia. If they chose to stay, their "reward" was digging graves for the dead or clearing rubble just to earn a bit of food and water.

dustyfalcon122 said:My main takeaway is that China is still holding its own against the Americans in the Pacific.
Actually, they're at a point where generals have openly admitted they aren't even sure if they could stop an invasion of Taiwan.

Your initial take is way off base—they aren't even remotely matching up against the Americans in the Pacific.

And all that talk from the generals? Please, that's just standard intelligence warfare... I mean, the Americans said Kyiv would fall in 48 hours, and the Russians actually bought into that nonsense...

The Chinese are actually a bit smarter than that—they know exactly what kind of nightmare is waiting for them if they try anything with Taiwan...

...especially since Taiwan itself has a pretty beefy air force packed with American jets (mostly F-16s) and solid anti-air defenses.

Melissa Rivera5 said:It's pretty much like what happened when Russia took over Crimea. There are already huge groups of people living along the borders and scattered around, so even the Russians don't really know how many Chinese citizens are actually inside Russia. So, you're basically saying they'd just hold those "legitimate" referendums—kind of like the ones in Crimea—where they set up these "people's republics" that then somehow justify joining up with China.

As for the regular military stuff... man, the invasion of Ukraine has absolutely wrecked their resources. It's gotten so bad they're out here making up tall tales about drugged-up Supersoldiers from Ukraine (I guess someone probably watched Supersoldier starring Jean-Claude Van Damme or something). But China? They have over a billion people. For them, sending a conventional force all the way to the Ural mountains wouldn't even be a struggle. And honestly, casualties are relative; losing 30k soldiers means next to nothing to them compared to the size of their actual invasion force.

Sure, Russia could always pull the nuclear option, but would you really do that just to grab more territory for China? Especially using those "legitimate" referendums as an excuse?

????
Am I speaking Turkish here?
We are talking about the actual use of Russian nuclear weapons during a Chinese military invasion of Russia and an attempt to seize Siberia—not some hypothetical debate about the maps of the "Great" China that include Siberia...

So, what, you just dreamt up this whole idea of holding a referendum in Siberia to hand it over to China? That's just the simple fix, right?

Go ahead, let them try. I'm sure the Russians will just say, "Sure, sounds good... everything is perfectly legal."

There is absolutely nothing coherent to read here.

If you guys are trolling, I gotta hand it to you—you're pretty damn good at it.

It doesn't look to me like China has any appetite for starting wars nearby right now; they seem more focused on tightening their grip and reinforcing autocracy within their own borders.😒

That’s not to say they don't have certain ambitions or intentions, but those aren't exactly top priority on their agenda for the immediate or even medium term. Right now, they are clearly leaning into technological advancement, building wealth, and maintaining stability.

Plus, they seem quite content with their business dealings with the European Union. We saw how friendly and "business as usual" their delegation and premier acted during the opening of the Golden Gate Bridge, for instance. I don't see them wanting to jeopardize a solid economic partner, whether that means indirectly helping Russia or trying to use an opportunity to attack Russia—either way, they would just end up destabilizing all their existing relationships, contracts, transactions, and trade.

wiredtiger8 said:????
Am I speaking Turkish here?
We are talking about the actual use of Russian nuclear weapons during a Chinese military invasion of Russia and an attempt to seize Siberia—not some hypothetical debate about the maps of the "Great" China that include Siberia...

So, what, you just dreamt up this whole idea of holding a referendum in Siberia to hand it over to China? That's just the simple fix, right?

Go ahead, let them try. I'm sure the Russians will just say, "Sure, sounds good... everything is perfectly legal."

There is absolutely nothing coherent to read here.

If you guys are trolling, I gotta hand it to you—you're pretty damn good at it.

Trolling? Nah. I'm just repeating Russian rhetoric; it's just that they're the target now instead of the ones saying it. You know, all that stuff about the right to self-determination and declaring people's republics and whatever.

PhnxCro said:I haven't really followed the last two pages, can someone catch me up? So, are the Russians actually gonna risk a nuclear Armageddon in the middle of unpopulated tundra just because they're 150 miles away? Or is this just about whether new maps can be printed on tan paper?

Based on their doctrine, they probably would, though what actually happens is a different story. Especially if the Chinese push for a referendum.

wiredtiger8 said:Alright, so why don't you explain it to us like we're little kids in elementary school? Just keep it super simple for us—how exactly would China invade and conquer Siberia without the Russians pulling the nuclear trigger if things start going south for them?

But honestly... when this whole Vladimir Putin thing finally wraps up, that Russian oil is either going to end up in American hands or Chinese hands. That's just how it goes.

And if history tells us anything, I guess it'll be American.

Oh, a referendum... please. Give me a break.
As if Russia would ever actually permit a vote to let half their territory walk away.

It’s honestly just pure absurdity at this point.

Matthew Young35 said:Oh, a referendum... please. Give me a break.
As if Russia would ever actually permit a vote to let half their territory walk away.

It’s honestly just pure absurdity at this point.

Well, they did permit it for 20% of Ukrainian territory already, so why not more?
At this rate, the Russians would happily sign off on a referendum to strip away more than half of Ukraine.

boldotter2 said:But honestly... when this whole Vladimir Putin thing finally wraps up, that Russian oil is either going to end up in American hands or Chinese hands. That's just how it goes.

And if history tells us anything, I guess it'll be American.

Great explanation there, except you still haven't cleared up how we actually get there... you know, like, where exactly along this "pathway" the Russian Federation just magically vanishes without everything blowing up in our faces...

... honestly, your logic reminds me of that old scene with bat Stojković and his legendary take on that joke from the '82 movie *Let's Go Further*...

... basically, there was this plane carrying an Englishman, a Bulgarian, a Frenchman, and some guy named Pero... he can't quite remember the specifics, but long story short, Pero ends up being the smartest one in the bunch and outsmarts everyone. Ha! Hah!
Link:

dustyfalcon122 said:My main takeaway is that China is still holding its own against the Americans in the Pacific.
Actually, they're at a point where generals have openly admitted they aren't even sure if they could stop an invasion of Taiwan.

The Navy isn't the only variable here.
Take World War II, for example. The British had a navy that was perhaps fifty times more powerful than the Germans, yet they still couldn't prevent invasions in Norway or Crete.
China is, after all, a somewhat more serious military power than Argentina to think they could just dispatch a fleet and wrap everything up in two weeks.

Comparing the Chinese fleet to the American one is a bit of a joke.
At this stage, it’s questionable whether you could even make a fair comparison with the British or the French.

Could China, for instance, send a fleet to the other side of the world and wage war there?
They might be able to manage that.