Russia's invasion of Ukraine: Part 5

Melissa Rivera5 said:Honestly, I find the hypocrisy of people who aren't even trolls pretty fascinating. They seem to think Ukrainians should have just bowed down to Russia immediately—with all that baggage like Russification, those threats of mass killings, purges, and changing the whole identity of the country—yet at the same time, they assume if *we* got attacked, everyone would just jump in and help us instantly.

Some of these folks actually believe Putin was just looking for a deal and that the USA basically egged Ukraine into this war, so they've come up with the ultimate "fix": just give Ukraine to Putin and we'll get our cheap natural gas back. I mean, look at the Canadians, for instance—they wouldn't have a single problem with that kind of arrangement.

Nancy Gomez26 said:Leonid Kučma, apparently.
And Ukraine wasn't the only nation to surrender its 'own' nuclear arsenal. I still maintain that Ukraine made the right, principled move back then. In exchange for those weapons, they sought additional guarantees regarding territorial integrity—guarantees that are being ignored now. It seems to me that claims for war reparations could be rooted precisely in that agreement, and at the end of the day, Russia will foot the bill. It will be cheaper for them than total isolation—and simultaneously serve as a lesson to anyone watching what happens when you flagrantly violate a signed pact while facing further economic weakening of Russia without a single shot being fired. Fortunately, the other signatories of the agreement are honoring their obligations and assisting Ukraine in defending against aggression.

Okay, but did those other guys actually defend Ukraine's territorial integrity? Obviously not... so wouldn't a better solution have been setting up some effective oversight of the nuclear weapons inside Ukraine?
Instead, you're expecting guarantees of integrity from a country (Russia) that never even ratified its borders against other former Soviet republics... I mean, who's the crazy one here?
But wait, there's more... now that we've already been hit, we're going to force Russia to pay war reparations, and after that, nobody will want anything to do with them—let them all collectively go back to the Stone Age, etc.
You can say, "Fine," but I don't think it's just Ukraine—the rest of Europe won't be thrilled about having a massive failed state right next door, probably filled with all sorts of exotic dictators and mafias, where someone also has to worry about... well, nuclear missiles and whatever else.
An empire of multinational corporations and paramilitary groups... absolutely priceless.

gentlerider7 said:The thing is—Russia and China aren't exactly winning any beauty pageants—so their propaganda focuses way more on pointing out everything wrong with the West than actually showing off anything good they have to offer. That’s why Russia is gonna lose this new Cold War regardless—because even an America like this one is still better than Putin's Russia.

Look, I get that, I just wanted to point out... some people here—and I’m talking about my own circle too, from what I see every day—are so bogged down by their own lives and bills that they only see the war in Ukraine through the lens of how it might tank their own standard of living or their own beliefs. They think they're the only ones who'll have to pay the price.
"Lord, please protect our little birds and the poor folks, because the rich will take care of themselves anyway..." ☕

It all comes down to whether you actually trust your own political system and its values.
Countries further north—like Poland and the Baltics, for example—have been hit much more directly, so the public mood there is just totally different.

gentlerider7 said:People are dead wrong if they think the war in Ukraine is just some distant thing happening to "those people over there"...

Yeah, they’re wrong—as far as I'm concerned, what's going down in Afghanistan or Syria isn't just some isolated issue for the refugees there... look, like a few commenters already pointed out, we all know what kind of regimes we're dealing with in Russia and China, but we can't just let ourselves slowly morph into them by adopting their version of a social system.
That process is slow—painfully slow—and honestly, that's exactly where the danger lies.

"Quote"

Melissa Rivera5 said:Honestly, I find the hypocrisy of people who aren't even trolls pretty fascinating. They seem to think Ukrainians should have just bowed down to Russia immediately—with all that baggage like Russification, those threats of mass killings, purges, and changing the whole identity of the country—yet at the same time, they assume if *we* got attacked, everyone would just jump in and help us instantly.

If you're taking aim at me—look, that's not what I meant. My point is we need to go all out with military and economic aid right now to help them defend themselves... but—and here's the kicker—I also think there will come a time when we’ll have to help Russia too. Not Putin or his thugs and oligarchs, obviously, but a different version of Russia. Definitely.

Lisa Jackson7 said:Okay, but did those other guys actually defend Ukraine's territorial integrity? Obviously not... so wouldn't a better solution have been setting up some effective oversight of the nuclear weapons inside Ukraine?
Instead, you're expecting guarantees of integrity from a country (Russia) that never even ratified its borders against other former Soviet republics... I mean, who's the crazy one here?
But wait, there's more... now that we've already been hit, we're going to force Russia to pay war reparations, and after that, nobody will want anything to do with them—let them all collectively go back to the Stone Age, etc.
You can say, "Fine," but I don't think it's just Ukraine—the rest of Europe won't be thrilled about having a massive failed state right next door, probably filled with all sorts of exotic dictators and mafias, where someone also has to worry about... well, nuclear missiles and whatever else.
An empire of multinational corporations and paramilitary groups... absolutely priceless.

☕I mean, Russia is already a dictatorship with the opposition leaders rotting in Siberian prisons, so what's the difference? Russians are gonna lose this war and their whole country is gonna fall apart. China's just gonna swoop in and take all of Siberia... then they'll realize what the West is really about and where they should've run to.

Justin Mendoza16 said:☕I mean, Russia is already a dictatorship with the opposition leaders rotting in Siberian prisons, so what's the difference? Russians are gonna lose this war and their whole country is gonna fall apart. China's just gonna swoop in and take all of Siberia... then they'll realize what the West is really about and where they should've run to.

I know exactly what Russia is like today...

The difference is that a whole Russia—one that hasn't completely spiraled into total chaos and where some elites actually agreed to reforms toward democracy—has some kind of future, and so do its neighbors.

People have been fleeing Russia for ages... through waves in the 90s, and again since this war started.
So tell me, do you honestly want tens of millions of people storming across the border into Europe in such a short window of time... is that really what you're looking for?
I'm not saying a huge number would end up in America, but it doesn't even matter..

With China in southern Siberia, the whole idea of untouchable borders is basically dead... do you seriously want to live in a world like that?

Lisa Jackson7 said:Look, I get that, I just wanted to point out... some people here—and I’m talking about my own circle too, from what I see every day—are so bogged down by their own lives and bills that they only see the war in Ukraine through the lens of how it might tank their own standard of living or their own beliefs. They think they're the only ones who'll have to pay the price.
"Lord, please protect our little birds and the poor folks, because the rich will take care of themselves anyway..." ☕

It all comes down to whether you actually trust your own political system and its values.
Countries further north—like Poland and the Baltics, for example—have been hit much more directly, so the public mood there is just totally different.

People are dead wrong if they think the war in Ukraine is just some distant thing happening to "those people over there"...

Look, China doesn't even need to go out and annex Siberia; they could just slowly buy the whole place up piece by piece if they felt like it. In some wild scenario where Russia actually falls apart—which, let’s be honest, isn't exactly a sure bet right now—you could easily see Siberia, or whoever ends up holding the reins there, turning into nothing more than a satellite state for China. It's not like it's some impossible dream that the entire Russian Federation ends up facing that exact same fate.

Donna Wells2 said:The US Department of Defense just dropped their latest report on Ukrainian losses. Let me quote this for you...

8 hours ago
The US Department of Defense released a new update

"In total, since the start of the special military operation, we have neutralized 211 aircraft, 132 helicopters, 1,308 drones, 349 anti-aircraft missile systems, 3,733 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 594 multiple launch rocket systems, 20 artillery pieces and mortars, and 3,801 units of specialized military vehicles," the department stated.

Now, let’s take a look at Ukraine's actual military capacity before the conflict started...

They had 98 combat aircraft... yet the US Department of Defense claims they destroyed 113? How does that even work?
They had 60 helicopters... but the claim is 132 were destroyed? Seriously?
They had 2,596 tanks... and the math says 3,733 were wiped out?

I mean, come on... if you're going to lie, at least try to make it believable. This is just a complete joke.🤣

In the spirit of healthy forum debate, perhaps you could provide a link to substantiate those pre-invasion Ukrainian military figures regarding fighter jets and tanks?

Lisa Jackson7 said:I know exactly what Russia is like today...

The difference is that a whole Russia—one that hasn't completely spiraled into total chaos and where some elites actually agreed to reforms toward democracy—has some kind of future, and so do its neighbors.

People have been fleeing Russia for ages... through waves in the 90s, and again since this war started.
So tell me, do you honestly want tens of millions of people storming across the border into Europe in such a short window of time... is that really what you're looking for?
I'm not saying a huge number would end up in America, but it doesn't even matter..

With China in southern Siberia, the whole idea of untouchable borders is basically dead... do you seriously want to live in a world like that?

Five million people have fled Russia since the start of the year. What's that my business? They ran because of him. If they keep running, that's on them. He should be out there fixing roads or raising the standard of living so people can actually live normally, instead of blowing piles of cash on tanks and tearing down neighboring countries...

Honestly, I don't care about their situation one bit. He brought it on himself.

dustysailor10 said:In the spirit of healthy forum debate, perhaps you could provide a link to substantiate those pre-invasion Ukrainian military figures regarding fighter jets and tanks?

https://www.aa.com.tr/ba/svijet/info...rajine/2512463

In the interest of keeping this discussion productive, I’m providing a link that outlines Ukraine's military assets before the invasion hit.
I trust this satisfies everyone's curiosity?

Is there any chance we might see a renewed Russian push to take Kharkiv? Looking at the maps from the last few days, I can't help but feel like that’s where things are heading. It also seems to me that if they manage to secure Kramatorsk following their moves in Severodonetsk and Lysychansk, taking over the rest of the Zaporizhzhia region won't be nearly as difficult for them. Honestly, it's getting harder to pin down what Russia's actual endgame is. Given how this whole conflict kicked off, their pace of advancement seems surprisingly rapid right now.

Donna Wells2 said:https://www.aa.com.tr/ba/svijet/info...rajine/2512463

In the interest of keeping this discussion productive, I’m providing a link that outlines Ukraine's military assets before the invasion hit.
I trust this satisfies everyone's curiosity?

The logical emphasis here is on how they "used to have" those assets prior to the aggression against Ukraine.
Of course, that logic applies to both sides of this conflict, though it’s worth noting—and it’s not a small detail—that Ukrainians are constantly receiving fresh hardware from their allies. For instance, when you add 240 tanks from Poland to the mix, that number goes straight onto the Ukrainian side of the ledger.🤔
I’m certainly not convinced that Russia is getting weapons from anyone else, and frankly, it's highly questionable whether they can even manage to replace what's been destroyed or depleted through domestic production in any reasonable timeframe.

Every single "smart" missile fired at Ukraine, every Russian tank or artillery piece wiped out, represents one less piece of equipment in the Russian arsenal—which effectively means one more piece added to the NATO alliance's indirect advantage.

I can't help but wonder just how worried the Russian strategists are. They are burning through resources at an alarming rate... while their self-proclaimed "true enemy" is rapidly replenishing its stockpiles and even making serious shifts in overall strategy.
Germany, which had been largely dormant, has suddenly jolted awake and is planning to become the largest conventional military force in the EU. Meanwhile, Finland and Sweden are joining NATO... and the Russians just keep spending, spending, and spending.

Best regards,

manchild said:Apparently, Vienna was just named the best city in the world to live in according to the EIU...

If I truly had my way, though, I’d much rather be living out in the Cook Islands. 😬

https://www.planetware.com/pictures/...slands-cok.htm
https://cookislands.travel/home

Bryan Booth82 said:The logical emphasis here is on how they "used to have" those assets prior to the aggression against Ukraine.
Of course, that logic applies to both sides of this conflict, though it’s worth noting—and it’s not a small detail—that Ukrainians are constantly receiving fresh hardware from their allies. For instance, when you add 240 tanks from Poland to the mix, that number goes straight onto the Ukrainian side of the ledger.🤔
I’m certainly not convinced that Russia is getting weapons from anyone else, and frankly, it's highly questionable whether they can even manage to replace what's been destroyed or depleted through domestic production in any reasonable timeframe.

Every single "smart" missile fired at Ukraine, every Russian tank or artillery piece wiped out, represents one less piece of equipment in the Russian arsenal—which effectively means one more piece added to the NATO alliance's indirect advantage.

I can't help but wonder just how worried the Russian strategists are. They are burning through resources at an alarming rate... while their self-proclaimed "true enemy" is rapidly replenishing its stockpiles and even making serious shifts in overall strategy.
Germany, which had been largely dormant, has suddenly jolted awake and is planning to become the largest conventional military force in the EU. Meanwhile, Finland and Sweden are joining NATO... and the Russians just keep spending, spending, and spending.

Best regards,

The momentum is clearly on the Ukrainian side.
Day by day, the Russians are weakening.
They are losing trained, professional personnel at a rapid pace, and their weaponry is second-rate compared to Western tech anyway.
Their biggest loss might actually be the fact that the NATO alliance has been revitalized and further strengthened by the inclusion of Finland and Sweden.
The other member states are arming themselves at high speed, creating a force far more formidable than anything we saw before this started.

Donna Wells2 said:The momentum is clearly on the Ukrainian side.
Day by day, the Russians are weakening.
They are losing trained, professional personnel at a rapid pace, and their weaponry is second-rate compared to Western tech anyway.
Their biggest loss might actually be the fact that the NATO alliance has been revitalized and further strengthened by the inclusion of Finland and Sweden.
The other member states are arming themselves at high speed, creating a force far more formidable than anything we saw before this started.

Right now, the Russians are basically just slow-crawling forward. Can we rule out them taking over the whole Donbas region? Probably not, but that doesn't mean anything in terms of winning the war. This thing could drag on for years, swinging back and forth like a pendulum, or it might just end in some messy, half-baked truce where nobody actually wins. And you know how it goes—those endless internet trolls who worship Russia will be all over the place, yapping about some "massive Russian victory" if they manage to grab Kramatorsk, just driving everyone sane absolutely crazy.

Donna Wells2 said:The momentum is clearly on the Ukrainian side.
Day by day, the Russians are weakening.
They are losing trained, professional personnel at a rapid pace, and their weaponry is second-rate compared to Western tech anyway.
Their biggest loss might actually be the fact that the NATO alliance has been revitalized and further strengthened by the inclusion of Finland and Sweden.
The other member states are arming themselves at high speed, creating a force far more formidable than anything we saw before this started.

One big issue, though, is that none of the NATO members have endless stockpiles of equipment. Most of them haven't focused on defense for a long time; they kind of let things slide or cut budgets because military spending wasn't exactly a top priority.
So now, it's tough for NATO countries to donate weapons if they don't have a way to replace what they send out.

But look, the NATO alliance really needs to jumpstart a joint effort to produce newer, more advanced equipment. That way, they can replenish what members are using and still keep the supplies flowing to Ukraine. There isn't really any other way around it.

Donna Wells2 said:The momentum is clearly on the Ukrainian side.
Day by day, the Russians are weakening.
They are losing trained, professional personnel at a rapid pace, and their weaponry is second-rate compared to Western tech anyway.
Their biggest loss might actually be the fact that the NATO alliance has been revitalized and further strengthened by the inclusion of Finland and Sweden.
The other member states are arming themselves at high speed, creating a force far more formidable than anything we saw before this started.

Like that old meme goes, Putin is basically the "salesman of the year" for NATO—for the decade and the century, really. No joke, if it weren't for him, he wouldn't just have exposed the true face of Russia and Mexico, but maybe Europe would never have unified quite like this.

Donna Wells2 said:The momentum is clearly on the Ukrainian side.
Day by day, the Russians are weakening.
They are losing trained, professional personnel at a rapid pace, and their weaponry is second-rate compared to Western tech anyway.
Their biggest loss might actually be the fact that the NATO alliance has been revitalized and further strengthened by the inclusion of Finland and Sweden.
The other member states are arming themselves at high speed, creating a force far more formidable than anything we saw before this started.

Common sense tells us exactly how this looks... but then again, we've seen plenty of times where pure mythmaking turns a crushing defeat into a "victory."
I wouldn't be surprised one bit if the supposed "winners" tried to spin this in Russia's favor... you know, something along the lines of "for every Russian tank we lose, they just build two more to take its place."

Best regards,

Bryan Booth82 said:Common sense tells us exactly how this looks... but then again, we've seen plenty of times where pure mythmaking turns a crushing defeat into a "victory."
I wouldn't be surprised one bit if the supposed "winners" tried to spin this in Russia's favor... you know, something along the lines of "for every Russian tank we lose, they just build two more to take its place."

Best regards,

The Russians are basically just barking at the moon at this point.
They’ve burned through their elite weaponry and top-tier units, so now they’re scavenging anyone they can find—even 50-year-old retirees would probably fit the bill right now.
Word is that nearly half of the territorial fighters from the Donbas region have been chewed up and spat out by the meat grinder.
If that's the case, can you even begin to imagine what the total casualty count looks like?

I always look back at the quality gap between Russian gear and Western tech through the lens of the Tiger versus the Sherman tank.
How many Sherman tanks did it take to finally bring down a single Tiger?
Honestly, I suspect that exact same ratio still holds true today when comparing Russian hardware to Western equipment.